Skip to main content

Full text of "University college"

See other formats
























SOME apology or explanation for the late appearance of 
this small book is due to all who are interested in the 
history of the College. The volume, which might well 
have been expected as the foremost, is nearly the last to 
be published in Mr. Robinson's Oxford series. The 
delay has been occasioned through the fact that the 
series was already well advanced when the privilege of 
attempting to deal with a not altogether easy task was 
accorded to the present writer. My first desire, now that 
my work is finished, is to confess its many shortcomings 
and to lament that it is so little worthy of the subject. 
I have, however, some good reason for expressing the 
hope that in the not distant future a much more com- 
plete history of the College is likely to be produced, free 
from the restrictions which are necessary to the volumes 
of a popular series. 

The history of University College as I have read it, 
except during one short period during its long course, is 
chiefly confined to an account of the slow growth of an 
institution and the gradual development of its activities, 
and I have chosen to stick close to this subject, even, I 
fear, at the risk of wearying the general reader. I have 


abstained from attempting to link the history of the 
College with the history of affairs external to it, for 
already a skilful use has been made by many of the 
writers in this series of most of the historical incidents 
arising out of Oxford academic life. The biographical 
portion of the book is especially insufficient, and in 
many cases I have only attempted to call to mind the 
mere names of distinguished members of the College. 

Through the courtesy of the Master and Fellows I 
have been allowed a very complete access to the College 
muniment-room. In the muniment-room are eleven 
thick quarto volumes, containing transcripts of the college 
documents made by W. Smith. These have proved 
of the greatest service to 'me, and though in almost all 
cases when I quote or make use of any document I have 
referred to the document itself, I have preferred, for the 
sake of simplicity in the reference, to refer to the 
volume of transcripts in which it is contained. The 
documents in the possession of the College, considering 
its great antiquity, are somewhat disappointing. 

The Bursars 1 accounts, with the exception of a few 
years, are complete from 1381 to 1597, and form the main 
authority for a considerable portion of the earlier 
history. The register begins in the year 1509, and very 
useful ledgers containing copies of leases and notes of 
compositions have been kept from 1588 onwards ; only 
partially complete lists of Fellows and members of the 
College are in existence before 1660. 

In stating dates, I have in all cases followed the 
modern method of reckoning, and have avoided giving the 
alternate years in cases where otherwise it would have 
been necessary. 


I am under very especial obligation to the Master for 
his kindness in reading through my proofs, and for much 
information on many points that he has been good 
enough to give me during the progress of the work. 
All responsibility, however, for the accuracy of state- 
ments contained in the book lies only with the author 
and the authorities quoted. 

To the Librarian of the Bodleian I am indebted for 
the permission to publish a drawing by A. Wood, and 
to Mr. Madan I owe thanks for kind assistance on many 
occasions. Mr. Farquharson, Dean of the College, has 
been good enough to help me in composing the short 
record of College Athletics, which space has obliged me 
to restrict to little more than a list of distinguished 
athletes. For the index I am especially beholden to 
Miss Wickham (of University College), who, amid many 
other occupations, has taken the trouble and found the 
time to compile it. 

May 19, 1902. 







TION, 1660 95 



IX. FROM 1745 TO MODERN TIMES. . . . 184 








VIEW BY LOGGAN (c. 1675) . . . . Frontispiece 



LIBRARY facing p. 66 




A CORNER OF THE HALL . . . . 1 88 



* The plan which appears on p. 64 should have been placed on 
P- 34- 




IN a petition presented to King Richard II. in the 
second year of his reign, his poor orators, the Master 
and scholars of his College called the ' Mickel Uni- 
verstie Hall in Oxford, 1 beseech the assistance of the 
Sovereign on the ground that their College was in the 
first place founded by 'his noble progenitour King 
Alfred ' for the sustenance of twenty-six divines for 
ever (Rot. Parl., viii. 69). No qualifying words 
impaired the certainty of this assertion, made in all 
publicity for the King's ear in open Parliament. In a 
statement so boldly proclaimed, and by the King and 
his Council readily accepted and acted upon, there is 
no appearance of sudden invention. Some semblance 
of truth was needed even in the contents of a fourteenth- 
century petition, and it is hardly conceivable that any 
but the clumsiest of plotters would suddenly originate 
as a matter of common knowledge such a remarkable 
figment from his own imagination. Some basis or sup- 
posed justification for this claim on behalf of the Great 
Hall of the University, however shadowy, must have 



been in existence at the time of its making. Though 
the declarations contained in the petition were promul- 
gated in the course of a lawsuit for the all-important 
purpose of winning the King^s support, they never for a 
moment appear to have been questioned by the other 
parties to the suit, whereas an impudent fabrication at 
the moment of a claim never previously heard of would 
hardly have escaped detection and denunciation by 
strenuous opponents. 

Tradition crediting King Alfred with the establish- 
ment of the University of Oxford was certainly in 
existence about the middle of the fourteenth century. 
Before the year 1363 Ralph Higden had recounted 
among the acts of the great King the institution of 
public schools of the various arts at Oxford.* 

Whatever may have been the origin of this tradi- 
tion, and however long it may have existed before 
this date, the notice by Higden of the connection 
between King Alfred and the University is the first 
mention of such a relation in any English chronicle 
unsuspected of interpolation. When once the connec- 
tion between the King and the University was estab- 
lished, it is not surprising to find the tradition that 
the c Magna Aula Universitatis ' owed its foundation to 
the same source. To whom else, it might well be 
asked, could the ' Collegium antiquius Universitatis/f 
the ' Senior Filia,' owe its first existence ? 

* ' Quamobrem ad consilium Neotis Abbatis quern crebro visita- 
verat, scholas publicas variarum artium apud Oxoniam primus in- 
stituit : quam urbem in multis articulis privilegiari procuravit.' 
Polychronicon Rolls Ser., vol. vi. 354. 

t The University in an epistle to Pope Eugenius IV., written 


From the latter part of the fourteenth century, when 
we first meet with the definite assertion of the royal 
foundation of the College, the fable rapidly gained 
credence, and was fortified by details. 

In a grant of the first year of his reign, King 
Henry IV. followed the example of his predecessor in 
acknowledging the College to have been ' de fundatione 
progenitorum nostrorum quondam Regum Angliae, 1 and 
a few years later Richard Wytton, Master of the 
College, pressed by the exigencies of a suit with the 
Abbey of Oseney, is emboldened to give further par- 
ticulars of the foundation, which prior to his time do 
not appear to have been divulged. In the words of his 

' The said Great Hall is a certain ancient College of the 
Foundation and Patronage of the aforesaid King that now 
is, and of his progenitors, sometime Kings of England : to 
wit, of the Lord Alfred, sometime King of England, Pro- 
genitor of the Lord King that now is, before time and in 
the whole time to the contrary, of which the memory of 
man does not exist, for a Master and 78 Scholars, viz., 
26 Grammarian Scholars, 26 Philosopher Scholars, and 26 
Theological Scholars, to be instructed and taught to sup- 
port, maintain, and sustain the faith of our Lord Jesus 

At first sight it is wellnigh incredible that, at the 
very time when these claims to antiquity of foundation 
were being openly made use of in the courts of law, 
the society should none the less be practically acknow- 

1441, in commendation of Mr. Richard Wytton, thus styles the 
College (Lib. Epistolarum Universitatis Oxon., F, fol. 58, Ep. 150, 
printed in Epistolcs Academics, O.H.S., p. 201). 



ledging their real founder in William of Durham. For 
at the very moment when they were publicly setting 
forth their claim to a royal founder, the effigy of 
William appeared on their seal. His arms were on 
their spoons in daily use, and to St. Cuthbert, Dur- 
ham's saint, was their chapel dedicated, while St. 
Cuthbert's Day was kept by them as their high-day 
and Gaudy Festival. Even the very name 'William 
of Durham's scholars,' by which at this time we find 
them frequently described, seemed to belie the higher 
claim put forth. But the apparently irreconcilable 
attributes of the rival founders were ingeniously com- 
promised by a further elaboration of the original tradi- 
tion by which William of Durham becomes no more 
than a restorer of Alfred's foundation. This view is 
expressed in a memorandum formulated for the pur- 
pose, and prefixed to the volume entitled 'Founders 
and Benefactors ' in the College muniment - room.* 
Here we are told that, after, and from the time of, 
the foundation by Alfred, the funds granted in support 
of the society were taken from the Royal Exchequer to 
the time of the Conquest, but that the Conqueror, 
desiring to destroy the English tongue, withdrew the 
money, and the scholars lived solely from the donations 
of those who loved the English tongue, until subse- 
quently they received William of Durham's endowment. 

* This memorandum is said to have been derived ' Ex veteri 
scriptura in fine parvi missalis et aliis Archivis Collegii.' It was 
printed by Brian Twyne (cf. Apologia, p. 249) as taken out of the 
Statute Book of the College, and William Smith places its date 
about the beginning of the fifteenth century (Smith's Annals of 
University College, p. 204). I regret that I have not been able to 
discover the source of their authority. 


This plausible explanation, which may probably have 
been devised to reconcile opinions and statements 
obviously conflicting, and which itself possibly dated 
from the beginning of the fifteenth century, was in 
course of time further improved upon by Thomas Caius* 
and Brian Twyne, the latter of whom contended that the 
original halls of Alfred's time passed from the scholars 
to the townsmen, out of whose hands they were redeemed 
by William of Durham's money. 

At a time when controversy, rather keen than critical, 
was in progress concerning the comparative antiquity 
of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, the fact 
that the claim of the College and the boast of the 
University were in harmony, made diligent antiquaries 
who were eager partisans of Oxford in the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries willing enough to accept the 
pretensions of the College in their desire to establish 
the priority of their own over the sister University. 

All went smoothly with the growing tradition until 
the beginning of the seventeenth century, when an 
injudicious and too eager attempt to convert it into 
a current historical fact proved eventually its ruin. 
In the fifth edition of Camden's Britannia (published 
in 1600) fresh particulars of the founding by Alfred, 
hitherto unheard of, were produced and vouched for 
by the author ' ut legitur in optimo manuscripto illius 
Asserii exemplari. 1 These direct statements proved 

* Tradition with Caius had yielded to positive assurance. He 
refers to the expression of opinion of Master Hutchinson (1518-46) 
and certain of the Fellows ' qui in scriptis significarunt delegatis 
regiis magnam Aulam Universitatis Oxon. fuisse ex fundatione regis 
Alfredi anno Domini octingentesimo ut patet ex antique scripto.' 
Assertio Antiqidtatis Academics Oxoniensis, ed. 1568, p. 337. 


too heavy a superstructure for the slender base of 
tradition on which the enlarged account of the founda- 
tion had been erected, and from the first aroused 
criticism. Grave doubts were expressed as to the very 
existence of the 'optimum manuscriptum' 1 quoted 
doubts which have never since been satisfied. 

Despite the injury done to the Oxford cause by 
Camden's extreme advocacy, the seventeenth-century 
antiquaries Brian Twyne, Gerard Langbaine, Arch- 
bishop James Ussher, Sir John Spelman, Anthony 
Wood, and Thomas Hearne maintained with more or 
less confidence the enlarged tradition, though A. Wood 
attempted to uphold the royal foundation of the 
University in conjunction with the seniority of his own 
College. The influence of their writings served to 
guide public opinion, never too critical in matters of 
evidence ; and when in 1727 the question of the right 
of visitation of the College came before the Court of 
King's Bench, after a lengthy hearing of evidence, it 
was decided that the College was of the foundation of 
King Alfred, and that the Sovereign was its Visitor. 

To this day the University in its Annual Calendar 
yearly proclaims that the College ' is said to have been 
founded in the year 872 by Alfred the Great; and holds 
to its own fifteenth-century description of the society as 
6 Collegium antiquius universitatis Oxon.' 

In the windows of the old chapel of the fifteenth 
century, sketched by Wood before its destruction, were 
memorials in ancient glass of the Saxon King, which 
are no longer in existence. The representations of him 
now in possession of the College owe their origin and 
appropriation to the antiquarian zeal of the late seven- 


teenth and early eighteenth centuries. The statue once 
over the hall door, but now, alas ! adorning the rockery 
in the Master's garden, has lost all royal resemblance 
owing to the perishable nature of the sandstone from 
which it was carved. It was presented to the College 
by Dr. Plot in January, 1683.* The picture of the 
great King, once in the hall, appears to have been 
secured in 1662 for the modest sum of 3. In the 
Master's Lodgings is a much smaller picture on oak 
panel of earlier date, the history of which is unknown. 
A white marble bust in the common-room was pre- 
sented by Viscount Folkestone as late as the middle of 
the eighteenth century. 

Year after year the venerable tradition has been kept 
alive, and is not likely to pass into oblivion so long as 
the seventeenth-century bidding prayerf is read, wherein 
first on the list of the founders and benefactors of the 
College of the Great Hall of the University is recited 
the name of King Alfred.}: 

On June 12, 1872, the College celebrated with much 
confidence and ceremony its alleged thousandth anni- 
versary, and at the commemorative dinner Mr. Lowe, 
then Chancellor of the Exchequer, in witty terms 
professed his adherence on principle to the ancient 

* The cost of the shifting of the statue appears in the Bursar's 
account as amounting to 2 i8s. gd. 

f In the bidding prayer in use in the time of Queen Mary the 
King is prayed for as founder of the University, but his name 
occurs but third among the benefactors of the College, after William 
of Durham, 'our chief founder,' and Walter Skirlaw, especial bene- 

I Of late years their keen sense of historical accuracy has led 
readers of this prayer to qualify the claim of founder by inserting 


tradition.* Nor is it likely that in the future the sons 
of the College will cease to cherish the flattering myth. 
For lusty traditions, certainly dating from the four- 
teenth century, are not so common as to be lightly 
cast aside at the bidding of too exact inquirers, and 
undergraduates may perchance derive comfort from 
Mr. Anstey's dictum, 'that as the Society is without 
doubt the eldest, so it seems in harmony with our 
general idea of propriety to attribute its origin to the 
wisest and best of our early Kings. 1 f 


From the North of England came the movement 
to which Oxford is indebted for the establishment of 
her two most ancient foundations, and to the influence 
of Durham in particular and its wealthy see both 
University and Balliol Colleges owe their origin. Had 
John de Balliol lacked the stimulus to his piety afforded 
by the penance imposed on him by the Bishop of the 
Northern diocese in 1260, there seems little reason for 
supposing that the clerks of Oxford would have secured 
the benefit of his charity. 

The existence at Durham of a great monastery, the 
Northern headquarters of the Benedictines, at the time 
distinguished as the most learned of the great religious 
Orders, and the succession of a series of powerful prelates 
'during the thirteenth, fourteenth, and early fifteenth 
centuries, displaying a rare devotion to learning, serve 
to account for the early examples of munificence to 
Oxford scholars which were set by the founders of 

* Guardian, June 19, 1872. 

t Introduction to Monumenta Academica, p. xxxii. 


University, Balliol, and Durham Colleges and by Bishops 
Thomas Hatfield and Walter Skirlaw. 

Of the early history of William of Durham nothing 
is known. As his name suggests, he was probably born in 
or about Durham, but whether, as William Smith sug- 
gests, he was educated in the Monastery of Wearmouth, 
and subsequently at Oxford, is a matter of simple guess- 
work. The first certain reference to him is as one of 
five distinguished English scholars whose names are 
given by Matthew Paris as leaving the University of 
Paris in consequence of the riots between the townsfolk 
and the University in 1229. He appears in the first 
instance to have migrated from Paris to Angers, but 
probably was not long in following his fellow-exiles 
from Paris to Oxford. Nicholas de Farnham, John 
Blondus,* Alan of Beccles, and Ralph of Maidstone,t the 
four other scholars mentioned by Matthew Paris, appear 
to have accepted the invitation held out on July 14, 
1229, by King Henry III. to the Paris Masters, and to 
have made their way almost immediately to Oxford, 
where they were gladly welcomed, and their example 
was probably soon followed by William. Nicholas and 
Alan were men of experience and recognised position 
at the time of their migration from Paris the one a 
distinguished professor of medicine, the other secretary 
to the Bishop of Norwich and afterwards Archdeacon 
of Sudbury and their fellows were in all likelihood 
contemporaries of equal standing. 

By Matthew Paris we are only informed that the 

* John Blondus became Chancellor of the Church of York, and 
died 1248 (Leland, Antiq. Collect., iii. 339). 
f Ralph afterwards became Bishop of Hereford 


future College founder was ' eminentissime literatus,' ' vir 
literatissimus. 1 * He also held considerable preferments 
in the Church, from which he had ample emoluments. 
At all events, at the time of his death he is said to 
have ' abounded in great revenues. 1 As Rector of Wear- 
mouth ' that noble Church not far from the Sea, 1 he 
had a grant from Richard Poor, Bishop of Durham, 
with the assent of the Chapter and the approval 
and confirmation of the King, of certain rights over 
the town of Sunderland and the Manors of Wearmouth 
and Sephor. The benefice and the rights in connection 
therewith constituted so valuable a piece of patronage 
that on William's death the King hastened to secure 
the bestowal of it on his half-brother Ethel mar. 

The appointment of his old associate, Nicholas de 
Farnham, to the See of Durham in 1241 led to dissension 
and litigation between the two former companions. Some 
attempt on the part of the Bishop to curtail or reduce 
his privileges was vigorously resisted by William, who 
carried a complaint to the Papal Court at Lyons. On 
December 22, 1248, before the Bishop of Albano and 
the Cardinal of St. Laurence, the dispute was settled, 
and a judgment favourable to William pronounced.t 
His success, however, availed William but little, as he 
died at Rouen on his journey homewards the following 
year.J In the Cathedral of Rouen are said to lie the 

* M. Paris, Chron. Maj., ed. Luard, v. 9. 

f Calendar Papal Letters, ed. Bliss, i. 251 ; and Register of Pope 
Innocent IV., ed. Elie Berger, ii. 30. 

\ M. Paris, Chron. Ma., v. 91. 

According to Leland, followed by Skelton, in his Pietas Oxonien- 
sis. Skelton made inquiries at Rouen so satisfactory to himself that 
he produces a print of the Chapel of the Virgin in Rouen Cathedral 
as being the burial-place. 


bones of this but-little-known ' Capellanus,' out of 
whose money was to spring the earliest beginning of 
the collegiate system of the English University. 

We are told that he ' abounded in great revenues, 
but was gaping after greater, 1 and the suggestion thus 
made led William Smith, in general a trustworthy 
guide, to presume that the See of Durham was the 
goal of his ambition, Farnham's voluntary resignation 
in 1249 serving to strengthen this view. But the fact 
that it was litigation, and no agreement or friendly 
understanding with the Bishop, that carried William 
to the Papal Court is sufficient to destroy the supposi- 
tion. Nor, indeed, does there seem to be adequate 
reason for believing a tradition that the archbishopric 
of Rouen* was within his reach, though it may well 
have been an object of his ambition. 

Whatever use this wealthy Churchman may have made 
of his ' great revenues ' during life, his disposition of a 
portion of them by will has redeemed his memory from 
obscurity, and has won for him an abiding fame. Great 
enterprises have no uncommonly small beginnings, and 
William of Durham's bequest to the University of 
Oxford of 310 marks wherewith annual rents were to be 
purchased for the use or benefit of ten, eleven, twelve, 
or more ' Masters,"* who were to be supported or main- 
tained from the same, was the first little rill of charitable 
beneficence which was eventually to swell into the mighty 
current of collegiate endowment in England. 

At a time when the influence of the University of 
Paris over the sister English University was so pre- 

* Odo Clement, Arch. Rouen, obiit May 5, 1247 ; Odo Rigaldi, 
consecr. March, 1248 (Hierarchia Catholica Med. JEv. t 447). 


dominant that by Papal instruction the order of teach- 
ing in the faculty of theology in the one was obliged 
to conform to that in use in the other, and when it was 
actually demanded that none should teach at Oxford 
unless previously examined and approved according to 
Paris rule,* it is not unnatural to look to Paris for a 
model and example on which the English founder may 
have based his bequest. Collegiate institutions of the 
simplest and most primitive character were there in 
existence before the middle of the thirteenth century. 
Their object was to enable a very limited number of 
scholars, specially selected, and drawn mainly from the 
ranks of the great religious Orders, to live in Paris 
whilst attending the lectures of ' Masters ' at the 
University, and it was not until the second half of the 
century that any collegiate provision was made for the 
secular student by the establishment of the College of 
the Sorbonne. In 1245 Pope Innocent IV. sanctioned 
the foundation of Stephen of Lexington, Abbot of Clair- 
vaux, by means of which his monks were enabled to 
live and study in Paris. Himself a 'Master' of Paris, 
an attendant at the Roman Court, and familiar with 
the scholars of his day, William of Durham devoted his 
bequest to the University of Oxford with a mind in 
all probability influenced by the example of endow- 
ments already in existence for housing and training 
scholars in Paris. His will is no longer in existence, 
and the nature of such instructions and conditions as 
may have accompanied the bequest can only be inferred 
from the terms of a certain inquisition f made in the 

* Chartularium Universitatis Paris, Denifle, i. 169, 189. 

f The document relating the results of the inquisition is in the 


year 1280 by ' Masters deputed by the Regents to 
inquire into and order those things which had relation 
to the Testament of Master William of Durham. 1 On 
due inquiry these Masters found that the said Mr. 
William did bequeath 310 marks to the University 
under this form, to wit, that with that money they 
should purchase annual rents for the use or benefit of 
ten or eleven or twelve Masters, who were to be sup- 
ported or maintained with the rents arising from that 
money. They proceed to state that 

' rents had been bought to the value of 1 8 marks or there- 
about, but as for the rest of the money, amounting to 100 
and ten marks, the University needing it for itself, and 
other great men of the land who had recourse to the 
University, nothing at all was as yet replaced/ 

We do not know when the original executors of 
William of Durham's will had paid over his bequest to 
the University, but, at all events, that body made no 
long delay in attempting to carry out the founder's 
wishes, and in 1253 made their first purchase,* laying 
out 36 marks in the buying of an ' angular ' or corner 
house standing ' in Vico Scholarum. 1 The site of this 
6 tenementum angulare,' described as ' versus Aquilonem 
cum Scholis et omnimodis libertatibus,' is now included 
in the front of Brasenose College. It was the first 
property held in possession by the University for 

College treasury (pixide AA.) It is 10 inches broad, yf long, in 
beautiful condition, with the seal of the University attached in fair 
condition. The translation here followed is William Smith's 

* The purchase deed, 6| inches by 8 inches, in perfect condition, 
but seal gone, is in the treasury, also the deeds relating to the 
subsequent purchases. 


educational purposes, and was granted to the Chancellor, 
Masters, and scholars of the same by the Prior and 
Brethren of the Hospital of Brackley, to whom it had 
been conveyed by Robert de Preston in return for 
Masses to be said for his soul.* 

In this their first purchase the University appears to 
have made something of a bargain, for the property 
had been conveyed in 1231 by Robert Oweyn to Preston 
for 55 marks. After the customary fashion of the day, 
by which the Halls were generally described by the 
names of their owners, this ' angle house ' became known 
as ( Aula Universitatis, 1 and is entered as the property 
of the University in the inquisition held in the seventh 
year of King Edward I., 1278-79. A second purchase 
was made in 1255, when the first house in the High 
Street on the north side was bought from the priory of 
Shireburne. This tenement bore the name of Drowda 
Hall, having come into the possession of the priory 
through the gift of William of Drogheda. It stands 
almost opposite to the present western gate of the Col- 
lege, is still known as Drowda or Drawda Hall, and has 
only recently passed out of the possession of the College. 
In 1262 Brasenose Hall was secured by purchase from 
Simon de Balindon, Canon of Lichfield, and in 1270 
a quit rent of 15s. charged on two houses in St. Peter's 
parish. This last transaction was the final purchase made 
by the University with William of Durham's money. 

Thus, at the time of the inquiry held in 1280, 

* Alan Basset's bequest, 1243 (referred to in H. Rasdall's Univer- 
sities of Europe, vol. ii., part 2, p. 469, quoting from B. Twyne, I., 
f. 169), cannot, in the opinion of the writer, be regarded as an 
educational endowment. It was primarily the foundation of a 
chantry for the benefit of the founder's soul. 


out of the 310 marks bequeathed, 177 marks 10s., or 
^118 6s. 8d., had then been invested, and 160 marks 
had been used by the University, partly for its own 
necessary occasions, ' and partly lent to other persons/ 
Possibly, as William Smith suggests, by ' the great men 
of the land who had recourse to the University,' reference 
is made to the nobles who attended in arms the Parlia- 
ment held at Oxford in June, 1258, with whose cause 
the scholars of Oxford were generally in sympathy. 
But the only request for a loan of the money of 
which we are certainly informed is one from Adam de 
Marisco,* about 1256(?), on behalf of Simon de 
Valences, praying the Chancellor to lend =40 of the 
money of Mr. William of Durham. The promptitude 
with which the University exactly accounted for the 
expenditure of the money of the benefactor points to 
the keeping of a separate account or chest for the 
purpose designed, and proves that during the political 
turmoil of the second half of the thirteenth century 
there had been no forgetfulness as to his intentions, 
which had been already partially carried out. 

The method of management is shown by a decree of 
congregation (probably held between 1256 and 1263) 
that two ' procurators 't should be chosen by the 
proctors to see to the repair of the houses in time of 
vacation, and to render accounts of the rents before 
Pentecost every year. The figures of expenditure 
already made (i.e., 177 marks 10s.), and those of moneys 
still due to be expended (i.e., 160 marks), show a 

* Monumenta Franc., i. 251, printed from MS. Cotton. Vitellius 
t Ex Statutis Universitatis Ox., Cod. A, fol. 108. 


balance of 27 marks 10s. over and above the original 
bequest of 310 marks. This excess may possibly repre- 
sent interest due on one of the loans made from the fund. 

The rents from the first purchases after the year 
1262 amounted to about 17 marks per annum, and as 
the sums so received, which in nearly twenty years would 
have amounted to a total more considerable than the 
original bequest itself, are not taken into account, or in 
any way mentioned at the time of the inquisition into 
the administration of the property, it is only a fair 
inference that such income was distributed as received 
to the objects of the testator's beneficence. 

There is no evidence to show in what fashion the 
small society of Masters existed on their founder's 
bounty before the University thought fit to prescribe 
for them formal statutes furnishing a rule of living. 
In the first statutes living together, ' simul habitantes,"* 
is mentioned incidentally, and rather as a matter of 
course than as the subject of a new regulation ; and 
the ordinance appears to have been made in pursuance 
of directions contained in the founder's testament. 
How or where the 'Masters' enjoying the proceeds of 
a portion of the bequest existed before the University 
laid down for them rules of living in formal statutes 
is but a subject for pure speculation. Life under a 
common roof was to their best interest, for thus the 
income, as yet most slender, would have been the better 
husbanded ; and it is not unreasonable to assume that 
living in common as beneficiaries, in conformity with 
their founder's will, they thus strove to fulfil the object 
of his endowment for the residence and maintenance of 
students in the University. 


William of Durham's example as the first Englishman 
to bequeath funds which might enable the secular clergy 
to study theology was soon to be imitated. Not a little 
of the importance attaching to this first foundation 
consists in the beneficial effect it produced as an 
example. One of the beadles of the University, 
William Hoyland, was the first to follow as a bene- 
factor, leaving by will his estate to the University. In 
1255 Walter Gray, Archbishop of York, bequeathed 
property to the University, and a year or two later 
similar bequests were made. The foundations of 
Balliol and Merton may, however, be regarded as by 
far the most important episodes carrying on the 
Durham scholar's example and idea. 

In the case of Merton, William of Durham's concep- 
tion of an endowment for the residence and mainten- 
ance of students was so far enlarged and extended by 
the wealthy Chancellor that the true origin of collegiate 
institutions in Oxford has sometimes been obscured. 
The early wealth of the Merton foundation, the rank 
and munificence of the founder, have combined to 
throw into the shade the priority of the scheme and 
the humbler original surroundings of William of 
Durham's scholars. Merton, moreover, has been fortu- 
nate in owning as her son the most laborious of Oxford 
antiquaries, an ardent partisan, but not an invariably 
accurate advocate in asserting her claims to priority 
in date among Oxford Colleges. On the other hand, 
in times long past members of the Great Hall of the 
University, not content with an assured priority in 
antiquity, yearned to establish for themselves the glory 
of foundation by the first great English King, and 


preferred association with a splendid but shadowy 
tradition to lesser fame and historical certainty. 

English institutions broaden and develop slowly, and 
the first beginning of the College system must not be 
sought for in a fully organized body, differing but little 
in essentials from a College of to-day, but rather in the 
first endowment, however slender, devoted to enabling 
needy students to live and learn in common at the 

Through the diligent cherishing of the tradition of a 
royal foundation the memory of the true founder has 
suffered. Despite the facts that in documents of the 
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries ' Aula vel Collegium 
Willelmi de Dunelm ' is a common form of description, 
though the College seal bore the inscription ' Sigillum 
Commune Scholarium Magistri Willelmi de Dunelm 
Studentium Oxonias, 1 though his arms appeared on 
College plate, and St. Cuthberfs Day was the day of 
special observance, all certain recollection of the first 
College benefactor seems to have faded by the end of 
the sixteenth century. In Queen Elizabeth's charter, 
wherein the very various titles under which the College 
was designated are given in detail, the phrase ' scholars 
of William of Durham ' is wanting, bad it is to relate 
that antiquaries and historians of this period were 
absolutely mistaken and in confusion as to the founder's 
very name and the date of his existence. 

Leland describes him as William Sherwood and the 
restorer of King Alfred's Hall. 'At this time Sher- 
wood, by his great liberality, freed them from that 
hard dearth of poverty, bestowing upon them so much 
gold or money as sufficed to buy their lands.' 


Stow* and Holinshead attribute the honour to 
William de Caerliph, Bishop of Durham, about the 
middle of the reign of the Conqueror, and even towards 
the end of the seventeenth century the College historian 
informs us that the deed of inquisition relating to 
William's benefaction, though actually in possession of 
the College, was unknown to himself and most of the 

The publication by William Smith in 1729 of his 
Annals of' University College has been the means of 
restoring the fame and honour of which the founder's 
memory had gradually been deprived. That most 
honest and accurate of workers among past records at 
a crisis in the College history, feeling himself bound to 
support a view which he believed to be just, published 
without reserve all that the close application of half a 
lifetime had taught him about the early history of the 

* CJ. Stow's Annals, ed. 1632, p. 1061 : 'Univ. Col., as some 
have written, was founded in the time of K. Alfred by Sir William, 
Archdeacon of Duresme, in the year 873 : but in a book intituled 
" the Acts of the Bishops of Durham," I find that the said Colledge 
was builded by William, Bishop of Durham, in the i2th year of 
the raigne of William the Conqueror, to wit in the year 1081.' 



THE first statutes of University College are distinguished 
from the earliest statutes of other Colleges by their 
brevity and remarkable simplicity. While the earliest 
ordinances devised for the government of the Sorbonne 
and those of Merton are numerous and abound in 
minute instructions, the rules laid down by the Masters 
delegated by the University for the government of 
William of Durham's scholars are few in number and 
free from minor details. In them there is no evidence 
or trace of imitation, and from the terse phraseology it 
would appear that their framers were only anxious to 
put into the form of ordinances such of the benefactor's 
intentions as could be clearly gathered from the wording 
of his bequest. 

In order that the wishes of the founder might be 
justly carried out, experience had probably shown that 
some form of government under definite rule was needed, 
and it was to meet this want that the University dele- 
gated to some of its members an authority to issue 
statutes as a kind of corollary to their inquisition into 
the disposal of William of Durham's money. In the 


statutes of 1280, owing to lack of income, provision 
could only be made for four * Masters.' These were to 
be 'well learned,' of good manners, and such as had 
ruled in Arts. They were to be elected by the 
Chancellor along with some Masters in Divinity, and 
other Masters in the other faculties chosen by their 
advice. The main qualifications of the four to be 
chosen out of all who should offer themselves to live 
upon the said rents were to be their fitness to advance 
or profit in Holy Church, and that otherwise they were 
unable to live fittingly (Iwnefste) in the state of Masters. 
It was further provided that in future elections into 
the society the four members should be called to the 
election (in addition to the University delegates), and 
that one at least should be a priest. Each of the 
Masters thus chosen was to receive 50s. per annum for 
his maintenance out of the rents already bought. 
Though small in comparison with the provision made 
for students in Paris, a shilling (12 sterlings) a week 
for commons appears to have been the recognised 
standard for maintenance in the earliest Oxford Colleges. 
Owing, however, to the absence of any specified time- 
limit for the retention of this pittance, a scholar in the 
Great Hall of the University was better off than a 
recipient of John de BallioFs benefaction, for the latter, 
after taking his degree, was at once discharged, and 
sometimes, sad to relate, was forced to follow some 
base employment to obtain a livelihood, unless happily 
he was fortunate enough to find a home among William 
of Durham's scholars.* 

* Cf. J. B. Mullinger, University of Cambridge, p. 265, quoting 
Papal Bull ; Lewis, Life of Wicliffe, p. 4. 


Control of the trust property was evidently from this 
time given to the chosen recipients of the founder's 
bounty, for it was ordained that one of the four, with 
' a certain Regent Master assisting him,'' should care for 
the rents then bought, and should see to the buying of 
others. He was procurator or bursar to the society, 
and for his services received 5s. a year more than his 
fellows. The repairs and custody of the houses were 
put into his hands, and he was instructed to use what 
diligence he could to cause the money lent to be paid 
in ; and on the accomplishment of this probably difficult 
task it was ordered that the money so recovered should 
be kept in a chest appointed for the purpose, the three 
keys of which were to be held by the Chancellor, the 
Bursar, and another Master whom the Proctors of the 
University should appoint. The moneys when collected 
were not to be appropriated to any other purpose than 
that appointed under the will of the testator, and as 
quickly as more rents should be bought the numbers 
and ' exhibitions ' (exhibitiones) of the Masters were to 
be increased. 

The four Masters living together (simtd Jidbitantes) 
were directed to study theology, but, in deference to 
the prevailing fashion in learning, they were permitted 
also, if they thought fit, to hear the Decretum and the 
Decretals. In their manner of living and learning they 
were to behave themselves, as should be ordered by some 
fit and expert persons to be deputed by the Chancellor. 
Who these fit and expert persons were and what rules 
they prescribed the statutes do not specify. But the 
brevity of the first statutes is partly explained owing to 
these matters being the subject of separate direction. 


Twelve years later in 1292 further statutes were 
made in a congregation of Regents and non-Regents at 
the procurement of the executors* of the will, and 
indented between the University and the scholars, and 
on both parts mutually sealed. 

These new ordinances, twenty-one in number, seem 
to have been devised owing to a need which had been 
felt for some more precise regulations to control the 
members of the society, and to the fact that William 
of Durham's executors, watching the progress of the 
infant community, desired to rectify the omission of 
any reference to William of Durham in the first statutes. 
They now insisted that, according to the will of the 
founder, in any case of a sudden need for the election 
of new Fellows, the choice should fall on Masters not yet 
promoted nearest to Durham, failing whom Bachelors, 
or, if need be, Sophisters nearest to Durham were to be 

The direction of the community had been placed by 
the first statutes in the hands of their senior Fellow, 
who, in all lawful and proper matters relating to the 
house, was empowered to rule the juniors. If this 
embryo Master of the College by diligent care 
succeeded in enforcing a close observance of the con- 
stitution by his fellows, and kept them inviolate himself, 
he was now granted half a mark beyond the allowance 
of the rest, c ad sua necessaria.' Probably a gathering 
in by some energetic Bursar of some of the moneys 
heretofore lent to the ' great men of the land ' justified 

* The names of William's executors are given in the forged 
Chapernay charter as Magistri Willielmus Syrkly, Edmarus de 
Chewyngham, Radulphus Senowrun (Smith, t. vii. 5). Videp, 42, 


this extension of bounty, which was shared by all the 
members of the society, who now, in addition to their 
50s. a year, were given for their servants and chambers 
half a mark each. The salary of the Bursar was also 
increased from 5s. to 10s. This he was to receive for 
his pains in looking after the goods of the house 
twice a year, but there was a saving condition attached, 
' if he performs it well/ 

The office of Bursar was only held for one year, and 
on his admission he was required to swear before the 
assembled society that he would perform the service 
fully and indifferently to everyone out of the common 
purse. His duties were now more clearly defined than 
they had been in the statutes of 1280. All the Fellows 
every year before Corpus Christi Day were to take of 
him a rational and full account unanimously, and on 
this heart-burning occasion all ' hatred, favour, prayer, 
and price ** were to be laid aside. The account was 
subsequently to be approved and signed by the Chan- 
cellor. The Bursars 1 rolls and account-books show that 
this practice was regularly followed until 1722, the 
only alteration being that the Vice-Chancellor comes to 
take the place of the Chancellor. There is now clear 
evidence of improvement in the income of the society, 
not merely in the increase of stipends, but also in the 
regulations made for the more careful preservation of 
the College property. An indented register of all the 
College goods was ordered to be made, one part of 
which was to be kept in the common chest, the other 
to be in the hands of the Bursar, and every year these 
lists were to be viewed by the Fellows before the passing 
of the accounts. Special provision was also made for 


the safe custody of the books belonging to the house, 
which were only to be lent under formal written agree- 
ment respecting their action, ' that he who has it may 
be more fearful lest he lose it.' No book was to be lent 
out of the College without the consent of all the Fellows, 
or without a pledge being left better than the book. 
The first library was now established, it being ordained 
that 4 one book of every sort which the house has be 
put in some common and secure place, that the Fellows 
and others, with their consent, might have the benefit 

A curious provision contained in the thirteenth statute, 
that any necessary book in the possession of the house 
should be lent gratis to every Opponent in Theology, 
Reader of the Sentences, or Regent that commonly 
reads, looks as if the members of congregation had 
sought some small advantage in return for their super- 

Statutes xvi., xvii., xix., xx., all deal with the social 
conduct and discipline of the members of the society. 
Faults were to be corrected privately, not in presence 
of one who was no Fellow, under a penalty of 2s. ; nor 
publicly in the highway, church, or field, under a fine 
of half a mark. No Fellow was to undervalue another, 
and in all these cases, doubtless to suppress disputes, 
4 he that begins first shall pay double. 1 It was found 
necessary also to fix bounds to the weekly expenditure, 
and except on the occasion of the three principal 
festivals, they were strictly forbidden to exceed 12 
sterlings a week, and to this statute the 4 manciple was 
yearly to swear at his admission. 1 

None of the Fellows were to hinder the honest 


government of the house in reading the lectures at 
dinner or in holding possession of the chambers of the 
house. All were to speak Latin often, ' that in their 
disputations and other Acts they might have a better 
and readier way of speaking it. 1 Finally, by the 
twentieth statute, the grave members of congregation 
made an attempt to deal with some common failings of 
youth, and it was ordained that they should 

' all live honestly as clerks, and as becomes holy persons, 
not fighting, nor speaking anything base and scurrilous, 
neither relating, singing, or willing hearing Ballads, or 
Fables about Lovers, luxurious or leading to looseness : nor 
deriding any, nor moving them to anger, nor making noise 
or clamour to hinder other men's quiet or study.' 

One of the most interesting in this body of College 
statutes of 1292 is that enabling the Fellows to admit 
to their collegiate life other persons not members of 
the society. The admission of these commensales the 
commoners of the future, and now the most important 
element in all but one Oxford College was in the first 
instance due to no educational zeal or desire to open 
the gates of learning to a larger class, but simply to 
secure such monetary assistance as might be derived 
from their payment for board and lodging. In the 
words of the statute No. xviii., ' Since the aforesaid 
scholars have not sufficient to live handsomely alone by 
themselves, it is expedient that other honest persons 
dwell with them.'* Not everyone, however, who applied 
was to be admitted, but ' every Fellow was secretly to 
inquire concerning the morals of everyone that desired 
to sojourn with them.' If by common consent such a 


person was admitted, he was only received after solemnly 
promising ' that, while he lived with them, he would 
honestly observe the customs of the Fellows of the 
house, pay his dues, nor hurt any of the things belong- 
ing to the house, either by himself or those that belonged 
to him. 1 This cautious admission of the stranger was 
to be held 4 every year before Whitsuntide, if convenient, 
lest the house should be in any way worsted or impaired 
by them." 1 

The statute-framers were also prudent enough to 
safeguard the interest of the house even against the 
Fellows themselves, and to stop the mouths of ' bablers ' 
in the society by enacting that ' none should reveal the 
statutes or secrets of the house to one that is not a 
Fellow,' an ordinance not unlike one contained in the 
statutes of the Sorbonne. 

No increase in the number of Fellows was made by 
the statute of 1292, there being 'sufficient scholars 
answerable to the incomes they have, 1 and no great 
change was enjoined in the course of their study, the 
only stipulation being that at every act they should 
have one disputation in philosophy or theology, and 
also have one disputation at least on the principal 
question of both faculties. 

At the commencement of the fourteenth century a 
considerable accession of means appears to have accrued, 
possibly through the repayment of that portion of the 
founder's money borrowed by the University. Four 
separate properties, mainly houses, were conveyed for 
the use of the society between the years 1307 and 

This increase of prosperity was doubtless the cause 


why a fresh body of statutes was promulgated so soon 
as 1311. But a desire to better commemorate the 
founder, and carry out his wishes more completely, 
appears as the influence underlying the new ordinances. 
There was a more marked tendency to localization. In 
all new elections the claims of Durham were now not 
to be denied. While the candidates to be proposed 
were, as before, to be of good morals, poor, or indigent 
in estate, and apt to make proficiency in the profession 
of divinity, ' he who was equal in other matters, and 
born nearest to the parts of Durham, should be pre- 
ferred before any other whatsoever.' It is next laid 
down that the study of theology shall be better pur- 
sued according to the founders will, ' so that they shall 
not mix therewith the hearing of any other faculty,' 
and the option of ' hearing ' the too-fascinating De- 
cretum and Decretals granted in the first statutes, ' if 
they shall think fit,' is now reduced to permission to 
study the same in the Long Vacation ' if they please.' 

To avoid the maintenance of but unprofitable students 
it was further provided that ' every Fellow within seven 
years of his hearing' shall oppose in the Divinity Schools,* 
and further ' proceed as is becoming.' A determination 
to uphold the character of the foundation as existing for 
the support of theological study is everywhere apparent, 
and from henceforth the Senior Fellow if not in Priest's 

* With this eighth statute, which reads, ' Item quod quilibet 
socius infra septennium suae auditionis in Scholis opponat et ulterius 
proficiat quoddecet,' compare the statute of the Sorbonne : ' Taliter 
est ordinatum quod nisi proficerent in sermonibus disputationibus 
et lectionibus ut dictum est infra septimum annum a tempore recep- 
tionis suae similiter privabuntur,' Chart. Univ. Par., ed. Denifle, 
P- 507- 


Orders was to ' cause himself to be ordained as soon as 
possible. 1 

In case of a Fellow being promoted to a benefice of 
5 marks a year, he was no longer to enjoy the benefits 
of the foundation, but another was to be elected in his 

In these later statutes the more frequent mention of 
the founder's name exhibits a further desire to bring 
his memory and personality into prominence and honour. 
The invocation at the beginning reads : ' To the honour 
of God and the Glorious Virgin, and also especially 
for the health of the soul of William of Durham. 1 
Every year in the parish where they lived the scholars 
or those who have been Fellows were to cause two Masses 
to be said for his soul, and the society were instructed 
that ' they shall make themselves, as far as lies in their 
power, to be called the scholars of William of Durham. ' 

The close connection between the University and the 
young community is the most remarkable feature in 
the early statutes of University College. This unique 
peculiarity, despite all injunctions to the contrary, has 
resulted in the present appellation of the College, which 
has proved a source of constant and not unnatural diffi- 
culty to the inquiring stranger. The University acting 
in trust for the founder, and so carrying out his bequest, 
was in effect the actual creator of the College. By the 
University, as a kindly mother, its first footsteps in 
earliest infancy were supported. Though the closer 
bond of union between the two was soon relaxed, yet 
the process of complete emancipation was extremely 
gradual, and was not finally effected until more than 
four centuries had elapsed after the statutes of 13 


Though surrendering in 1311 to the members of the 
society the right of election to vacant Fellowships, the 
University maintained their authority by substituting 
a power of confirmation or rejection, and although at 
the same time the closer supervision of the College pro- 
perty was relaxed, it was not withdrawn. Mention of 
' the certain Regent Masters assisting the Bursar ' and 
representing the University ceases, but ' the Bursar of 
the house shall still every year give a true account of 
all his receipts and expenses before the Chancellor and 
some others he shall call to him.' 

In the fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth centuries 
whenever it was found necessary or desirable to go beyond 
the existing statutes, or in cases to meet which no provi- 
sions existed, it was to the University that the College 
looked for permission and advice, and the numerous 
examples of licenses and dispensations granted by that 
body during these three centuries prove a constant and 
often minute supervision. 

The University seems from the first to have discharged 
the singular visitatorial authority which had devolved 
upon it unsought with strict justice, and at the same 
time in no spirit of meddlesome interference, a due 
regard being paid to a growth of independence in pro- 
portion as the young society gained strength to stand 



Masters: Roger Aswardby, circ. 1332; John Pocklynton, 
circ. 1362 ; William Kexby, circ. 1378 ; Thomas Foston, 
circ. 1392; Thomas Duffield, circ. 1396; Edmund 
Lacy, circ. 1398. 

THERE is no historical evidence as to the place where 
William of Durham's scholars first found a home, but 
all circumstances point to an establishment of the society 
in the tenementum angular e^ or corner-house, standing 
in School Street. It is a fair supposition that they 
were more likely to live in one of the houses bought for 
them by the University than in a hired hall, and this 
view is supported by a special provision contained in 
their first statutes safeguarding them against an exercise 
by the University of the existing right under statute 
to convert any halls into schools if required. 

The corner-house was the first purchase made on their 
behalf, and being of considerably less rental value than 
either Drowda or Brasenose Hall, was the most likely 


to have served as the first (common) dwelling of the 
slenderly endowed poor scholars. In the Aula Univer- 
sltatis it is natural to look for the so-called scholares 

It is difficult to suggest any reason why they deter- 
mined to forsake this seemingly well-chosen site which, 
with Brasenose Hall close at hand, would appear to have 
offered all facilities for extension in the future. It may 
be that, noting the large area secured by the founder of 
Merton, they fixed their eyes on the oblong space bounded 
by the High Street on the north, by what are now 
Logic Lane on the east and Grove Street on the west, 
and by the lane no longer in existence known as Kybald 
Street on the south, and, looking forward with a true 
sagacity, marked down the whole of this central and 
commanding site for gradual purchase when opportunity 
should offer ; or possibly chance rather than design in 
their search for suitable investments led them to the 
spot where it was destined that the University College 
of the future should stand, a most dignified ornament 
in the majestic course of the High Street. 

Another accession of property, the gift of Philip 
of Beverley in 1328, probably encouraged the more 
ambitious among the Fellows to plan an enlarge- 
ment of their borders. Mr. Philip, whose surname was 
Ingleberd, was a Doctor of Divinity and Rector of 
Keyingham in Holderness. Probably enough, being a 
Northerner who had reaped benefit from William of 
Durham's foundation, he magnanimously gave in his 
lifetime a mill, five bovates and a half and three acres 
of land, and two tofts with their appurtenances in 
Paghel and Keyingham to the Masters and scholars 


for the choice and maintenance of two scholars or 
Masters born near Beverley. In the words of his gift 
was inserted a provision in case ' it should happen that 
the University of Oxon should be transported to some 
other place, 1 showing that at this time the permanent 
establishment of the University was not held to be 
absolutely certain. The worthy Philip did not confine 
his benefactions to the College, but he also enlarged his 
church at Keyingham. His piety was so renowned that 
in after-years miracles were worked at his tomb, and 
the very elements, when a fearsome storm burst over 
Keyingham Church, are said by the monastic chronicler 
to have spared his resting-place.* There must have been 
some connection or acquaintance between this bene- 
factor and the Lady Dervorgilla de Balliol, for her soul 
was amongst those to be prayed for by the grateful 
College in return for his benefaction.t 

The whole of this property did not come to the 
College immediately on the grant, for it was bestowed 
subject as to part to a life interest ; but the prospect of 
certain succession in the near future probably emboldened 
the Fellows to undertake the enlargement of their house. 

In 1331 letters patent were granted by the Crown 
to enable a purchase of rents to the value of W for 
the maintenance of the scholars of the Hall of the 
University, and in the following year the purchase of 
Spicer's Hall in the High Street was effected and the 

* Chronica de Monast. de Melsa (Rolls Ser., iii. 194). 

t The lands he gave, says Smith, were either all or most swal- 
lowed up by the river Humber (Annals, 169). St. John's College 
however, purchased from one John Lambert in 22 Henry VIII. 
8 acres which he had bought of University College (Poulson, Holder- 
ness, ii. 482). 


property conveyed to the society. This tenement was 
the first house in St. Mary's parish, and stood near or 
about the present Western Gateway, and was probably 
' a single house of no greater length than five rooms on 
a floor, nor backward further than where the present 
quadrangle extends ' (Annals, 58). 

This formerly (1278-79) went by the name of Durham 
Hall, and then belonged to Andrew of Durham, an 
Alderman of the city. Afterwards it became known 
as Selverne or Spicer's Hall, and was purchased by Master 
William de Nadale and Robert de Patryngton for the 
College from the three daughters and coheiresses of 
Adam Feteplace, for some years Mayor of Oxford. In 
the conveyance it is described as a certain messuage 
with appurtenances situate between the tenement of 
the Prioress and Convent of Stodley, or Studley, on 
the west and Lodelowe Hall on the east. 

The resources of the society were still further 
strengthened in 1332 by a considerable bequest under 
the will of Robert de Riplingham, Chancellor of York. 
Like Ingleberd connected with Beverley, and probably 
also in his time one of William of Durham's scholars, 
he left ^300 for the perpetual maintenance of scholars 
and masters studying in theology in the University of 
Oxford ; but whether the College succeeded in securing 
this sum appears somewhat doubtful, for we find them 
in July, 1333, agreeing with one Peter de Langton to 
present him with 4>0 if he could but gain them the 
legacy. It is curious that both in the case of Philip 
Ingleberd's grant and RiplinghanVs bequest provision 
in almost identical language is made ' if it should happen 
that the University of Oxon should be transferred to 


some other place. 1 One of the reasons for this uncertainty 
was the acute dissension existing between the Australes 
and Boreales, which made a migration of the latter 
likely enough. Indeed, RiplinghanTs executors appear 
to have excused themselves from payment of the money 
until the Boreales, to whom it was mainly left, were 
safely settled. 

Even though Peter may have failed to earn his full 
commission, the administrators of the College funds 
had funds enough in hand steadily to continue their 
purchases of small ' halls.** Rose Hall and White Hall 
4 lying in Kybald Street,' and with small gardens probably 
running back to and adjoining the garden of Spicers 
Hall, were obtained in July, 1336, and Lodelowe Hall* 
adjoining Spicer n s on the east, and facing the High 
Street, was bought a few days later. The process of 
acquisition was the same as in the case of Spicer's Hall. 
Two Masters on this occasion, Robert de Patryngton 
and John de Pokelyngton, effect the purchase;! and 
shortly after, under a license for alienation in mort- 
main, transfer it to the society. Very probably William 
of Durham's scholars moved into their new home shortly 
after securing Rose Hall and White Hall. Without the 
accommodation these provided there would hardly have 
been room for the ' honourable persons ' whom the statute 
declares it expedient should dwell with them. As Wood 
points out, these separate buildings would be well fitted 
for the housing of those living with them, yet not on the 

* Lodelowe Hall, ' quondam locata Aula Henrici Coci ' (Cartulary 
St. Frideswide, p. 464). 

I Cf. Calendar of Patent Rolls, Edward III., 1334, 1338. 


The scholars carried with them to the new domicile 
the name of the old, and Spicer's Hall became hence- 
forth known as Aula Universitatis, with sometimes the 
additional description at first ' in Alto Vico ' to distinguish 
it from the old establishment in Vico Scholarum. In the 
Cartulary of St. Frideswide in 1379, it appears as ' Aula 
quondam Durham nunc Universitie Hall. 1 * 

The styles by which the society was described in the 
fourteenth-century deeds varied in curious fashion, and 
go to prove that it was not in the power of its members, 
or perhaps in their will, to make themselves be called 
the scholars of William of Durham. In deeds between 
1340 and 1360 they are generally styled 'Magistri et 
Scholares Aulae Umversitatis. 11 After 1361 the desig- 
nation 'Magistri et Scholares Magistri Willelmi de 
Dunelm 1 appears again more frequently, while subse- 
quently to 1380 a new appellation, 'Magistri Aulae 
Magnae 1 is of frequent occurrence. In the first of the 
Bursars 1 rolls now in existence (that of 1381) the style 
is, ' Collegium Willelmi de Dunelm, vulgariter appellati 
Mickle Universitie Hall.' 

During the greater part of the fourteenth century 
transfers of property are generally to and from the 
6 Masters and Scholars," but in a deed as early as 1329 
the constitution is described as ' Magister et Socii."* 
Very frequently in documents of the fifteenth century 
the expression is ' Magister et Scholares sive Senior 
Socius et Consocii. 1 The Senior Fellow, to whom a 
qualified authority over the rest was given under the 
statutes of 1311, only gradually appears to have 
assumed the title of 'Magister Collegii.' Although 
* Oxford Historical Society, i. 371, 


the title is made use of, the names of the earliest 
Masters do not appear to be given in any of the deeds 
in possession of the College. 

Roger de Aswardby is the first whose name is given 
as Master, and he appears to have held the office from 
about 1340 to 1360. Under his guidance as head of 
the society the purchasing of halls and tenements steadily 
proceeded. Thirteen of these properties in addition to 
the three original purchases made by the University 
had been secured to the society before 1360. The 
annual revenue from houses in Oxford amounted at this 
time to about %&. Some of these early possessions 
were so variously situated that they became subsequently 
included in the sites of no less than six of the older 
Colleges. Satisfied with the security of these invest- 
ments, the College now proceeded to buy on a larger 
scale, and, in their eagerness to gain for themselves 
what doubtless looked like a tempting bargain, laid up 
trouble for many years to come. 

On June 5, 1361, Master Laurence Radeford and two 
other Fellows of the house, conveyed a number of mes- 
suages and shops in the town, and some arable and 
meadow land in the suburbs, to the College. This pro- 
perty had belonged to the Goldsmith family in Oxford, 
and two years previously had been sold by John Gon- 
wardby, a citizen of London and husband of the heiress 
of the Goldsmiths, to the three Fellows. A bond of 
Laurence Radeford, in 1360, for the payment of 160, 
appears to represent the purchase price. This money, 
or a part thereof, seems likely to have been the gift of 
one Robert Caldwell, for a condition of the conveyance 
to the College is that they shall provide a chaplain to 


pray for his soul. Probably also Radeford was Cald- 
welFs executor, besides acting in the purchase on behalf 
of the College. The citizen of London either inno- 
cently or wittingly conveyed to the College property in 
which he had only a life interest, and either ignored or 
concealed two deeds of 1308 and 1309 by which his 
father-in-law, John Goldsmith, had settled the whole 
estate in part on his descendants. The College was 
first made alive to the nature of the title under which 
they held by an action commenced against them by 
Philip Jedewell and Joan his wife, grand-daughter of 
John Gonwardby, the original vendor, for the recovery 
of a portion of the property, consisting of a tenement 
and two shops.* This claim was founded on the deed of 
settlement made in 1308 by John Goldsmith in favour 
of his descendants, and seems to have been good at 
any rate, the Master, Roger Aswardby, and the Fellows, 
agreed to pass a fine, and paid 4>0 to the Jedewells 
for relinquishing their suit. A few weeks after they 
made a further payment of 100 marks, in return for 
which the balance of the property was passed to them 

* The following short pedigree will help to make clearer the 
relationship of the parties. 

Walter Goldsmith. 

John Goldsmith (the settlor of property by deed 
in 1308-1309). 

John Goldsmith, Johanna^=John Gonwardby. 

ob. s.p. 

Thomas Gonwardby. 

Henry Gonwardby, Joanna=FPhilip Jedewell. 

ob. s.p. 

Idonea= Edmund Francis. 


by Philip and Joan. Doubtless the College hoped that 
by these additional payments they had finally avoided 
all further question about the title. 

For some years this appeared to be the case, but they 
little knew how pertinacious an assailant was to rise up 
against them in the person of Idonea, the only child 
and heiress of Philip and Joan Jedewell. Married to 
a ' citizen and grocer' of London, Edmund Francis by 
name, it soon appeared that she and her husband were 
unlikely to abate a jot of any interest to which they 
might find themselves entitled in law. On April 12, 
1377, they issued a writ against the society, and based 
their claim (by which they challenged the whole estate) 
on the family settlement made by John Goldsmith on 
July , 1308. The College, having already paid twice 
for the property, seem to have attempted no compro- 
mise by way of settlement, but to have stiffened their 
back and braced themselves to resist to the utmost a 
claim which they regarded as unjust and a most cruel 
hardship. The result was a magnificent piece of litiga- 
tion lasting for nearly twelve years, and passing in and 
out of almost every available court in the realm. The 
lawyers engaged on either side, and especially on that 
of the College, exhibited an ingenuity and faculty for 
misrepresentation worthy of the admiration of the pro- 
fession throughout all time. 

The Master and Fellows entered on the fray fairly well 
versed in the ways of the law. Not only had they been 
through the preliminary engagement with the Jedewells, 
but they had also only concluded, in 1379, a troublesome 
litigation with St. Frideswide's. 

The Plaintiffs from the first seem to have desired 


that the trial should be in London, the Defendants 
on the other hand wanted Oxford. On this initial 
point the College gained the advantage, for the 
case was removed to Oxford on the Monday after the 
Feast of Trinity (1377) on a successful showing that 
Oxford claimed privilege of London in that no suit of 
freehold bargain or trespass lying or begun there could 
be tried out of the Mayor and Bailiffs 1 Court. Subse- 
quently the cause was heard before the Mayor and 
Bailiffs in the Hustings Court on June 28, 1378, and 
there judgment was given against Idonea by default. A 
technical error on the part of the court in taking evidence 
entitled the plaintiffs by writ of error to recall the case 
to the Court of King's Bench, and there the verdict given 
at Oxford was reversed as erroneous, and the whole pro- 
cess commenced afresh. The action was fought at great 
length, and, as William Smith says, 'sets forth the 
fashion of trials in those days, which possibly are not 
much different in our own.'* 

Edmund and Idonea secured judgment on the Octave 
of Trinity, 3 Richard II., 1380, against the College 
tenants for three messuages, ten shops, one cellar, 14 acres 
of land, 15 of meadow, and 8s. rent. Shortly after, 
whether from effect of the judgment or by consent of 
the tenants, who may have grown weary with the pros- 
pect of long litigation, the successful grocer and his wife 
entered into possession of the disputed tenements and 

The College, however, was still far from beaten ; in 
fact, anticipating that judgment was likely to go against 
them, and that they had but little to hope from courts 
* Annals, p. 109. 


of law, they determined to run all the risks attendant 
on royal patronage, and to throw themselves upon the 
mercy of the King. To win his favour and support 
was the urgent object of the moment, and it was clear 
to them that the best way of bringing this about was, 
if possible, to prove to the Sovereign that his and 
their interest were identical. Hence sprung into 
being that remarkable document already referred to, 
and generally known as ' the French petition. 1 * 

This was addressed to the King and his Council, 
probably in the year 1379. In it his ' poor orators," 
the Masters and scholars, boldly describe themselves as of 
'your College called Mickel University Hall, which 
College was first founded by your noble progenitor King 
Alfred, whom God assoile, for the maintenance of 24 
Divines for ever. 1 The iniquitous oppression of Edmund 
Francis is then dwelt on, and the sad tale told how 

' tenants by collusion have lost by default the lands and 
tenements, and how the said Edmund, looking upon the 
said Masters and Scholars as unable to maintain against 
him any process or suit in regard of his great power, does 
from time to time endeavour to destroy and utterly dis- 
inherit your said College. That the College is unable to 
withstand him, for though they have sufficient evidence so 
to do, yet he has procured all the Panel of the Inquest 
to be taken in the matter by gifts, treats, and other 

The King, since he is the true founder, is petitioned 

* In the Record Office, Anc. Pet., file 19, 915. 
t ' Par douns, mangeries et aultres sotisvoies.' Wra. Smith's 
translation is here followed. 


to stay the process and to hear the case before his 
Council, 'so that your said College be not tortuously 
disinherited.'' This extraordinary document concludes 
by urging the King to his work of interference by a 
reminder ' that the noble Saints John of Beverley, Bede, 
and Richard Armacan, and many other famous Doctors 
and Clerks, were formerly Scholars in the said College/ 
It is likely enough that, at a time when success in a 
lawsuit appears to have greatly depended on the skill 
of lawyers in originating ancient evidence in support 
of their respective cases, this ' French petition ' was 
regarded as a move of great skill in the keenly-contested 
suit. Up to the present stage the forged deeds* con- 
cocted on behalf of the College (of which some are still 
in existence) had failed to win the day, possibly enough 
on account of the greater skill in fabricating evidence 
displayed by the wealthy adversary. If the already 
twice-bought property was to be preserved, it was found 
necessary to introduce another issue into the case. 

By representing the rights and interests of the Crown 
as threatened through the ' disinheriting ' of an ancient 
royal foundation, this good object was at once attained, 
and henceforth the conflict was continued not only 
between the parties to the suit, but also between the 
Crown and the courts of justice. 

It was not uncommon for litigants in danger to seek 

* Possibly among these may be reckoned the Chapernay charter, 
dated 1220, so called from Master Ludovicus Chapernay, Vice- 
Chancellor of the University, mentioned therein ; but there is some 
reason to suppose that this most daring of fabrications was con- 
trived for the purpose of another lawsuit (Wytton's Assize) in the 
next century. The Chapernay charter was regarded by Brian 
Twyne as genuine, but mistrusted by Wood. 


assistance from the Crown by admitting that royal 
rights or privileges were involved, and in the reign of 
Richard II. the Crown was especially ready to claim 
jurisdiction and extend its influence. A petition so 
much in accordance with royal interests was subjected 
to no close scrutiny. The fact that the noble saints 
John of Beverley and Bede were defunct more than a 
century before the birth of the reputed ' Founder and 
noble progenitor King Alfred ' would have but little 
weight with the King's advisers, even if it was com- 

The petition was read and the circumstances of the 
case considered before the King and his Council in 
Parliament at Westminster, and the desired result was 
immediately brought about. It was ordered that both 
parties be summoned before the King^s Council, and 
that they have the King's express command to surcease 
in the meantime in the plea and inquest, until it should 
be otherwise ordered by the King.* Possibly the instruc- 
tions came too late to stay judgment against the College 
tenants in the Court of King's Bench in 1380, or it 
may have been disregarded by an upright bench. Any- 
how, it encouraged the College to persist in a most 
determined resistance. A writ of error with regard to 
the judgment given against them in the King^s Bench 
was secured, a hearing before the King and Council 
obtained, and a writ of supersedeas issued, declaring 
the decision of the court given in favour of Francis 
null and void. Such was the immediate effect of the 

* Another petition (undated) followed, perhaps in 1380, giving 
more details as to what had happened in the suit (R.O., Anc. Pet., 
file 132, 6,590). Abstracts of the three petitions filed are printed 
in O.H.S. Collectanea, iii. 143-145. 


King's interference, but so doughty an antagonist as 
the London grocer was not to be checked by any mere 
royal writ. He and his advisers were well versed in the 
fourteenth-century forms of procedure, and, though for 
the moment deprived of all benefit from their judgment 
in the King's Bench, quickly found other means of 
harassing the College and pursuing their suit. 

The scope of this work makes it impossible here to 
follow out with exactitude the many moves and counter- 
moves which followed in this intricate litigation, which 
would more fitly serve as matter for a special monograph 
on the ways of the law in the fourteenth century than 
as incidental matter in a College history. 

Some insight into the incidents of fourteenth- 
century litigation is afforded by the Bursars' rolls for 
1381-82, 1382-83, and 1384. Master Richard Gower 
the Bursar had the matter in hand on behalf of the 
College, and the details of expenses connected with his 
various journeys to London on the business of the 
house are given in full. 

In 1382 Master Midylton and Robert Westby the 
tenant for life of the greater part of the property in 
dispute, bore him company to London. They were 
attended by two servants. The party were in all eleven 
days absent, and the various items of their travelling 
expenses afford interesting reading. The cost of their 
united suppers varied from 8d. to lid., their breakfasts 
from 2d. to 7d., and dinners, which are not recorded 
every day, from 5d. to 14d. The modest charge of 2d. 
is made for beds, Id. for fire, and 2d. for candle. The 
attorney in common bench then as now received the 
time-honoured fee of 6s. 8d., and the fact is stated 


without shame that, to facilitate the processes of justice, 
several people had to be treated with wine. 

In the rolls for 1382-83 and 1383-84 the expenses 
of three journeys in each year are entered. One of 
them was undertaken by John Pokelyngton, the Master 
of the College. In the last of these years the efforts of 
the litigants appear to have been redoubled, for we find 
among the entries mention made of expenditure in 
gifts, wine, ' jentaculo,* et pluribus aliis, 1 to the serious 
amount of 32s. lid. 

The need for these extra gifts and treatings was 
probably occasioned on the presentation of a further 
petition-f- to King and Parliament in 1383-84, where it 
is stated that the implacable Edmund and Idonea had 
procured a writ of formedon, and to meet this a new 
supersedeas is asked for.J In the reply to the petition 
the request is granted, one of the reasons being ' for 
that it is well known to the King and his Lords that 
the suppliants are so poor that they are unable to 
pursue or defend their right, 1 and it was further agreed 
and granted by the King and his Lords in Parliament 
that the right and claim on the one part and the other 
should be finally declared and determined before the 
King's Council. 

Not only did the Sovereign give the ' College of his 
ancestors "* all assistance in his power through his Council, 
but he actually put them into a better position to help 

* ' Cibus quo solvitur jejunium ante prandium ' (Ducange). 

t Ancient Petitions, 978, R.O., printed in Rotuli Parliamentornm 
iii. 1766. 

J The presumption is that they obtained this, for a writ of super- 
sedeas is dated New Sarum, May 22, 1384 (see Turner and Coxe, 
p. 291). 


themselves, by an alteration of the law specially de- 
signed for their benefit. Throughout the suit one of 
the difficulties of the College had been to keep their 
tenants loyally up to the fighting point, for though the 
greater interest belonged to the reversioners, yet the 
actions for recovery of possession of the property in 
question were brought against the tenants for life. 

Now, as the law stood the plaintiffs had won their 
case against the tenants, and the College, though 
deeply interested, had no locus standi. This difficulty 
was, however, removed by an Act of Parliament 
(9 Hie. II., c. 3.) amending the existing law, and 
enabling a reversioner to proceed by ' attaint ' or 
writ of error, in case of a false verdict or erroneous 
judgment against a particular tenant. The statute was 
specially extended to the two judgments previously 
given in the King's Bench, and was just in time to 
enable the harassed College to resist the writ by which 
in February, 1385, they were commanded without further 
delay to yield up to Francis and Idonea the seventeen 
acres of meadow under the judgment of the King's 

A hearing, possibly ex parte, before the King's 
Council appears to have followed, and the Council 
and justices if the words contained in a later writ 
from the King may be believed (August 2, 1388) did 
what * good faith and a sound conscience required, 1 and 
gave judgment in favour of the Master and scholars, 
after having seen and examined the evidence ' with 
great deliberation, 1 and a declaration of the right of 
the Master and scholars seems at that time to have 
been enrolled in the King's Chancery. 


Despite the royal response to the supplication of the 
College for assistance, Edmund and Idonea continued 
to 'implead, weary, disquiet, and openly threaten by 
writs of fresh Force, and other pleas and processes,' as 
well in their own name as in the name of other ' their 
complicers and encouragers. 1 But their activity only 
served to rouse the Crown to a more threatening 
attitude. Writs of supersedeas, declaring that the 
original judgment in favour of Francis had been found 
in the King's Chancery void and erroneous, were issued 
to the Sheriff of Oxford, to the Justices of the Common 
Pleas, and to the Mayor and Bailiffs of the city. They 
all were strictly commanded that if any further pleas 
were commenced against the Master and scholars an 
end should be put to them, and Edmund and Idonea 
were informed that they should 'prosecute before our 
Council if they think expedient, where we will cause 
a completion of speedy justice to be made to them/* 

All further means of proceeding being thus appa- 
rently denied them, a graceful disappearance of the 
plaintiffs might have been expected. Not so, however, 
with that indomitable pair, who, failing all remedy in 
the courts of law, now succeeded by some mysterious 
means in securing the submission of the whole case 
to arbitration. The result of this arbitration was 
announced as a final settlement (of the case) in the 
King's Court at Westminster on January 21 and 
February 3, 1389. The title of the College was 
acknowledged hereby, but only in consideration of the 
payment of a further sum of ^113 6s. 8d.t 

* Ubi eis celeris inde justitiae complementum fieri faciem.' 

~ m f Cal. Inquis. post mortem, iii. 108. 


It is satisfactory to note that such protracted litiga- 
tion did not embitter subsequent relations between the 
parties. An item ' Pro vino cum Edmundo Franceys 
et aliis xi d1 in the Bursar's roll of 1390 is sufficient 
testimony of reconciliation, and for many years the 
College leased a small tenement from their old adversary, 
and paid him a small annuity. 

It is not easy to understand how the society con- 
trived to pass through this long period of litigation 
without incurring serious financial disaster, but the 
bursarial rolls, except in the reduction of the number 
of Fellows, exhibit no great monetary strain. The 
external College rents, as entered in the roll of 1382, 
amount to 4>3 11s. 7d., but as for a short period 
three Fellows, if we may trust the account for commons, 
constituted the society, there would be enough both to 
afford a livelihood and to bear the costs of litigation. 

In the earliest rolls the commons rarely exceeded a 
shilling a week for each Fellow, while battels averaged 
only a little more than a penny a week. The wants of 
the little society of from three to five Fellows, and six 
or seven others lodging with them, were ministered to 
by a staff of four servants, comprising cocus^ mancipius, 
barbitonsor, and lotrex. 

The end of the fourteenth century found the College 
buildings in the High Street in much the same state 
as when first purchased, a group of the original small 
houses standing with no architectural arrangement, 
and converted as best might serve to the purposes of 
the society. Constructed of clay and wood, and mostly 
thatched, they doubtless presented a picturesque rather 
than dignified appearance. The accounts for repairs 


show considerable use made of moss, red earth, and 
straw, from which we may gather that, while the cost of 
building of this class would be small, the durability 
would also be of a limited nature.* 

Lodelowe Hall (adjoining Spicer's on the east) 
was not included within the College until quite the 
end of the century, and the receipts from its letting 
for many years formed an important item in the 
rent-roll. The wall between the pleasure-garden (di#- 
portum) of Lodelowe and that of the Hall of the 
University was cleared away in 1392, and from the 
previous year we may probably date the inclusion of 
the former Hall. Before this extension there appear 
to have been only nine cameras in the College, 
and these are specified in the Bursar's roll of 1312 
with their respective rents. The buildings were two- 
storied, and appear to have been ranged round an 
inner court in some fashion approaching a quadrangular 
shape ; for we hear of work being undertaken infra 
quadratum. The rooms varied in rental value from 
20s. per annum for the camera principalis to 6s. 8d. for 
the camera super erbormm.-^ We hear of the chamber 
opposite the well, and of the chamber ' together with ' 
the hall. This hall, or refectory, was originally a por- 
tion of the Spicer tenement, and served the society till 
the year 1450. It is strange that a foundation for 
students in theology should have existed in the first 
instance without a chapel, but thus it was with the 

* Hart Hall, which was let in 1363 to Roger Aswardby on lease 
then contained ' Unam aulam et sex cameras bene cooportas ' about 
100 years later the building is described as ' am non existans nisi 
una parva domus.' 

f Cf. Bursar's roll, 1392 



University scholars who at first made use of the 
Churches of St. Mary and St. Peter in the east, where 
not a few of the earlier members of the College were 
buried. This state of things was remedied in 1369, 
when a license* from the Bishop of Lincoln was pro- 
cured to celebrate 'in capella seu oratoria infra mansum 
aulae nostrae constructa ' ; but it was not until thirty 
years later that Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Lincoln, 
licensed and consecrated the chapel in honour of St. 
Cuthbert. In the Bishop^s license the chapel is de- 
scribed as being new, and recently constructed within 
the site of the College 'decentem opere admodum 
sumptuoso ad laudem Dei.'' It is worthy of notice that, 
notwithstanding any existing Alfredian tradition and 
all the bold assertions in the recent ' French petition,' 
it was to St. Cuthbert, the patron saint of Durham, 
that William of Durham's scholars chose to dedicate 
their chapel. 

In the statutes of 1311, provision is made for the 
placing of one book of whatever kind in some common 
place. At first the number of books was probably so 
very small that a chest or chests sufficed to contain 
them. We hear of volumes being bequeathed to the 
society both in 1336 and 1368, but slow indeed must 
have been the acquisition of these precious treasures 
during the infancy of the College. t 

* License dated January 10, 1369. 

t In 1336 S. Gravesend, Bishop of London, bequeathed books to 
four different Colleges (Ninth Report, Historical MSS. Commission, 
146). In 1368 Simon de Bredon, 'astronomer,' and a former 
Proctor, bequeathed books to each of the six secular Colleges, 
including University College (Reg. Archbishop Whittlesey, folio 122, 
quoted by Maxwell Lyte, p. 181). 


Mention of a library* on the ground-floor is first 
made in the Bursars roll 1391, which is about 
the time of the inclusion of Lodelowe Hall. There is 
some reason for believing that the taking in of that 
property supplied, among other wants, a storing-place 
for the few books possessed by the society. Bishop 
Skirlaw's donation of books at the beginning of the 
next century (1404) was made by means of indenturet 
under which three volumes of Doctor de Lyra and 
three other volumes entitled the Repertorium, etc., were 
passed to John Appleton the Master under stringent 
conditions as to their safe keeping. They were to be 
deposited within the library, to be fastened with iron 
chains and never lent. So highly was this acquisition 
valued that on Appleton's retirement the fact that 
during his mastership such treasures had been secured 
was duly recognised as constituting a strong claim on 
his behalf to the gratitude of the College. 

The end of the century thus found the society in 
possession of the usual concomitants of early collegiate 
life. The chambers named from their situation or after 
their occupants, the refectory, the chapel, the library 
all these essentials to a well-ordered common life had 
only been gradually secured as benefactions allowed, 
and the same process of growth by gradual increase, 
when the donations of the benevolent permitted, con- 
tinues throughout the next and the following century. 

Besides what names have been mentioned in the text, 

* A. Wood will not admit the existence of a library at this early 
date. At first the society kept the books they had, which were but 
few, in chests (Wood's Colleges of Oxford, p. 51). 

t The indenture, now in the College muniment-room, has been 
printed in Arch. JEliana, vol. ii., p. 99, by W. C. Trevelyan. 



the following were, or have been reputed in this earliest 
period to have been, William of Durham^ scholars : 

WILLIAM SHIREWOOD : Thesaurarius Liiicolniensis, 1259 
(Notitia Oxoniensis). 

JOHN BACONTHORPE : the 'Doctor Resolutus'; a Carmelite 
and friend and teacher of Richard Fitzralph (Ricardus 
Armacanus) ; migrated to Paris ; returned to England 
in 1321 ; was preaching in opposition to the Mendicant 
Orders (Dictionary National Biography). 

RICHARD RADEFORD, or de Retford, S.T.P., afterwards 
Provost of Queen's : originally from Balliol (Ayliff, p. 294) ; 
obtained from Clement VI. canonry of York, 1343, with 
expectation of a prebend (Bliss Papal Reg., iii., 127). 

WILLIAM KEXBY : Master c. 1378; Archdeacon of Cleve- 
land, 1379 ; buried in Ecclesia Ebor. (Willis's Survey, 79). 

ROBERT WALDEBY : Archbishop of York, February 4>, 1 396. 
In one of the windows of the old chapel Wood records the 
inscription : ' Orate pro anima Mag. Rob. Waldeby quondam 
Arch. Ebor/ (Dictionary National Biography). 

HENRY CROMPE, or Crump, Cistercian, c. 1 390 : Theologian ; 
at first an opponent of Wickliffe, afterwards of the Mendi- 
cant Orders (Dictionary National Biography). 

JOHN CRUM : Vice-Chancellor in 1406 and 1408 ; Arch- 
deacon of Barnstaple, 1400 ; Chancellor of Exeter Cathedral, 
February 23, 1429; died 1436 (Dictionary National 

EDMUND LACY : Master c. 1 398 ; afterwards Bishop of 
Hereford and Bishop of Exeter. 



Masters : Edmund Lacy, c. 1398 ; John de Appleton, 1403 ; 
John Castle, 1413; Robert Burton, 1420-1426 ; Richard 
Wytton, 1426-1430; Thomas Benyngwell, 1430-1441 : 
John Marten, 1441-1474; William Gregforth, 1474- 
1488; John Rokysburgh, 1488-1509. 

IN the Church crisis at the end of the fourteenth and 
beginning of the fifteenth centuries, brought about by 
WyclifiVs teaching, the general sympathy of the Univer- 
sity was without doubt on the side of the great reformer. 
From such scattered fragments of evidence as we now 
possess, we find that the sentiments prevalent in the 
Great Hall reflected the general Oxford views in favour 
of reform. The close association then existing between 
the University and its Hall makes any expression of 
opinion by the members of the foundation which had 
been first established to enable seculars to study theology 
at Oxford of interest as indicating the current of religious 
thought in the University. 

From the nature of its origin, the traditional inclina- 


tion of the College must have been to the side of the 
secular clergy in their struggle against the growing 
power and encroachments of the Mendicant Orders. In 
the middle of the fourteenth century Richard Fitzralph,* 
Archbishop of Armagh, once a member of the society, 
if tradition and direct assertion are to be trusted, was 
distinguished by a lifelong support of the secular clergy 
and an outspoken and unsparing denunciation of the 
friars. At the close of the same period the members 
of the Great Hall, following boldly in his steps, not 
only maintained his position with regard to the rights 
of the seculars, but advanced in doctrine, and when the 
opportunity offered showed themselves to be on the 
side of Wycliffe. On the occasion of Archbishop 
Arundel's attempted visitation in 1397, they braved 
the serious anger of that arbitrary and unforgiving 
prelate by a declaration of their views and a resolute 
maintenance of independence. Imitating the successful 
resistance of the University to his visitation, they also 
questioned the Archbishop's right and denied him access 
as Visitor ; but the real spirit of their opposition appeal's 
to have sprung from their leanings towards the new 

Five years before this the zeal for reform of Henry 

* The name of Richard ' Armacanus ' appears in the ' French 
petition ' already referred to. The linking of the Archbishop's 
name with those of John of Beverley and the Venerable Bede was 
probably contrived to enable the two eighth-century worthies to 
pass muster as alumni of the College under cover of the name of 
one who had been a scholar of William of Durham's house within 
the memory of living folk. The fact that Balliol justly claims him 
among her early Fellows in no way prejudices the claim of the 
Great Hall, for we know that Richard was for some years in Oxford 
after the lapse of his Fellowship at Balliol. 


Crump, a Carmelite monk who resided in the College, had 
attracted the attention of the ecclesiastical authorities. 
Crump, though at first strong in opposition to Wycliffe's 
doctrines, became subsequently so strong a supporter of 
them, and so earnest an opponent of the Mendicant 
Orders, that in May, 1392, he was called upon at 
Stamford to abjure his opinions. He appears, however, 
to have appealed successfully against the sentence, and 
in the same year a commission was appointed to inquire 
into his alleged offences against orthodoxy. 

At the beginning of the next century there were 
several members of the society who must have fallen 
within the category of those denounced by Convocation 
in 1408 as ' degenerate sons and abortives who as well 
by their words as actions preach disobedience and sow 
their darnel among good seed. 1 Such were John Kexby* 
and Robert Burton (afterwards elected Master in 1420), 
who are enumerated among ' the chiefest persons that 
quarrelled with the Archbishop's constitution.'! Ac- 
cording to Wood, they so disturbed the University that 
they were threatened with excommunication, after which 
' they acknowledged themselves peccant.'! In fact, how- 
ever, excommunication was in 1411 pronounced on the 
whole society, from which an appeal was made to the 

Archbishop Arundel, supported by the King and 
backed by the clergy in Convocation, proved too strong 
for the University, and the Provincial Council held at 
Oxford in 1407 was followed in 1411 by a successful 

* John Kexby, Chancellor of York, ' sepult in Eccles., Cath. 
Ebor., 1432.' See Survey of York Cathedral, p. 79. 
t Wood, Annals, i. 543. J Ibid., i. 555. 


visitation held in St. Mary's Church, ' quoad haereticum 
pravitatem.' To make the stringent decrees passed in 
the Council of 1407 effective, a committee of twelve 
persons, ' six southerners and six northerners," 1 was 
appointed to inquire into, examine, and reprove the 
Wycliffite books and lectures. Among the twelve on 
the Northern side was Richard Fleming, a student 
in divinity from the Great Hall of the University. He 
seems to have been appointed as a representative of the 
reformer's views, and by his early utterance of ' divers 
propositions rankly smelling of heresy ' brought himself 
into prominence. Fleming declared openly for some of 
the propositions condemned as heretical by the rest of 
the committee. On this the Archbishop forwarded a 
mandate to the University warning against the pre- 
sumption of certain persons, ' qui et puerilia rudimenta 
non transcendunt, vix adhuc ab cunabulis adolescentiae 
exeuntes.'* The Archbishop's scorn does not seem 
to have silenced Fleming, but may have modified his 
opinions, which subsequently appear to have become 
sufficiently orthodox to justify his appointment to the 
bishopric of Lincoln, in which capacity he acted as 
President of the English Mission at the General Council 
of Pa via, and at a later period he distinguished himself 
by the foundation of a college designed to support and 
maintain the study of accepted theology. 

The Fellows of the Great Hall were not, however, 
unanimous in their Lollard propensities, for we may be 
certain that Edmund Lacy, Master about 1398, was 
rigidly orthodox in his views. We find him acting as 
Commissary to Philip de Repyngdon in his continua- 

* See Concilia Magn. Brit., Wilkins, iii., p. 322. 


tion of the Arundel visitation in 1413, and he after- 
wards became Bishop of Hereford, and subsequently 
Bishop of Exeter. 

The College does not appear to have remained long 
under the ban of the Archbishop. Whether any formal 
submission or recantation was made does not appear. 
But the spirit of the reformer was not dead in the 
place, for in 1439 we hear of some plaints being made 
before the Council of Basle against Philip Noreys, 
Principal of Little University Hall from 1429 to 1431, 
on account of his lectures in the schools and furious 
controversy with the Augustinians. This renowned 
canonist maintained with renewed vigour the general 
attack on the mendicants, and though through the 
influence of the Orders his lectures appear at one time 
to have been condemned in Rome as heretical, a letter 
from the University and the direct influence of Duke 
Humphrey of Gloucester saved him from further penal- 
ties, and he was subsequently appointed Dean of St. 
Patrick's in 1457. 

Despite the losses sustained in their recent great law- 
suit, and the terrors of impending excommunication, the 
fifteenth century opened for the society with a gleam 
of prosperity. 

John Appleton, the Master, appointed about 1403, 
was a shrewd and prudent head, and influential beyond 
the immediate limits of his place. To him great credit is 
given for the part he played in persuading Walter Skirlaw, 
Bishop of Durham, to aid the house to hold its own 
among the wealthier foundations by which it was now 
surrounded. Skirlaw, whose abilities had raised him 
from humbler walks in life to fame as a diplomatist, 


and to the wealthy bishopric of the Northern Palatinate, 
had at the beginning of his career experienced the 
benefits of William of Durham's foundation. It was 
becoming that a donation to his old College should be 
recorded among his many acts of princely munificence. 
In 1403 he agreed with the Masters and Fellows to 
convey to the College his Manor of Rothyng Margaret, 
now Mark's Hall, in Essex, for the maintenance of three 
Fellows, who, beyond their commons, rooms, ' servientes 
et alia necessaria,' were to receive forty shillings per 
annum ' in pecunia numerata.' Unlike the Founder's 
Fellows, choice was not confined to Masters, but those 
not yet graduated, as long as they were good and 
honest, and 'ad studendum in Theologia verisimiliter 
apti,' might be elected. The actual donation came in 
1404, in which year came also the gift of his books 
already mentioned. 

Walter de Skirlaw died in 1416, and was buried 
before the altar of St. Blaise in his own cathedral. In 
the petition for suffrages on his behalf, in answer to 
which the prayers of 294 societies were secured, he is 
spoken of as 'in donando largissimus in eleemosinis 

The society showed their gratitude to Master 
Appleton for his tact and good offices in calling the 
attention of the Bishop to the needs of the College by 
admitting him many years after (in 1438), when infirm 
and blind, to the benefit of a Fellowship during his 
life. The spending of the good Bishop's money was 
begun before it was actually received, for in 1402 
we find sums of money expended on the library, 

* Durham Obituary Rolls, Surtees Society, p. 56. 


and in the same year a most important purchase was 
made, whereby the reversion to the remaining High 
Street frontage between what had been Lodelowe Hall 
and the present Logic Lane was secured. This com- 
prised two tenements Little University Hall and the 
Cok on the Hoop at the corner adjoining the 
lane then described as 'quondam venellam vocatam 
Penkerychese lane alias Horsmyllane/ but now known 
as Logic Lane. This reversion appears to have 
fallen in about two years later in 1404. More 
building was undertaken in 1405, probably to make 
room for Bishop Skirlaw's scholars. A small proof of 
growing prosperity is afforded in the increase of the 
staff of servants, and by the employment of a pincerna ; 
but later (in 1440) the further financial straits of the 
College appear to have compelled the cook to perform 
the duties of the two offices. 

The newly acquired property in Essex was not, more- 
over, at first a source of profit. The land was, accord- 
ing to the custom of the day, farmed by aJBrmamu on 
behalf of the society. A considerable sum was neces- 
sary to stock it in 1410-11, and farming operations then 
as now seem to have shown slender and disappointing 

Under Masters Lacy, Appleton, and Castle, the 
College, now aided by Skirlaw^s benefaction, had made 
distinct forward progress. All three appear to have 
been men of a standing and capacity superior to that of 
their predecessors in office, and to have attracted 
scholars of distinction both on the foundation and as 
sharers in the student life of the society. Between the 
years 1406 and 1418 we find the Great Hall providing 


one of the Proctors on seven occasions, and Commissaries 
to the Chancellor in 1407 and 1409. 

Richard Fitzhugh was a member in 1406, and became 
Bishop of London in 1431. 

Edmund Lacy, already referred to, was promoted to 
the Bishopric of Hereford in 141 7, and to Exeter in 1420. 

Richard Fleming, who acted as Proctor in 1407, 
afterwards proved himself a distinguished Bishop of 

Castle held valuable preferment in the Diocese of 
York with the mastership, and in 1422 became Chan- 
cellor of the University. Possibly the progress of the 
society was a little in advance of the means at its dis- 
posal, for its total income in 1418 amounted only to 
56 6s. 10d., and this was found insufficient to meet 
the bare necessities of existence. A dispensation 
granted by Archbishop Chichele to Robert Burton, 
Master in 1420, records in melancholy terms the 
poverty which hindered and oppressed the growth 
of the College in the first three centuries of its 
existence. Burton's earnest endeavours to re-establish 
the Great Hall, and to restore it from its condition of 
extreme misery, ' summa miseria sua,' must have proved 
a difficult task, for the dispensation tells of debts, of 
property in pledge, of some of the tenements in ruins, 
and many more downcast and irreparable. 

Whatever may have been effected for the society by 
Burton's zealous advocacy was thrown away by the folly 
and mismanagement of his successor, Richard Wytton, 
elected about 1426. Unchecked by experience of past 
litigation, or by remembrance of the losses sustained in 
the great suit of the previous century, he entered into 


a lengthy and expensive lawsuit with the Abbey of 
Oseney, lasting from 1427 to 1432, in which, after 
conflicting decisions, the abbey seems to have secured 
the final victory. In the accounts for these years 
heavy items are to be found under the heads of 'in 
placitationibus et jurisperitis,' and if the society was 
poor before the coming into office of Master Wytton, 
it certainly was poorer when his mastership came to an 

Nor did Thomas Benyngwell, who succeeded about 
1430, eminent preacher though he may have been, 
according to the account of Thomas Caius, improve the 
state of affairs. He also, acting on behalf of the College, 
yielded to the temptations of litigation, while on his 
own account he was driven to protect his character 
against scandalous charges. Sad to relate, the Master, 
with one Agnes Bablake, were summoned on January 28, 
1435, to appear before the Bishop of Worcester in 
Merton College Chapel. But happily the evil-tongued 
Agnes publicly withdrew the base rumour, and con- 
fessed that she alone had been responsible for its 
promulgation. The parties received 'purgation,' but 
the scandal can hardly have proved other than injurious 
to a society consisting mainly of students in divinity, 
even in the fifteenth century. 

Towards the end of BenyngwelPs mastership, in 1439, 
Drowda Hall and four or five of the chambers in the 
College were unoccupied, and scanty means were still 
the pressing evil of the time. Wealthy founders had 
provided New College (1379) and All Souls (1437), and 
were about to furnish Magdalen, with magnificent build- 
ings and ample revenues to maintain them, but the con- 


dition of the fabric of the Great Hall was a century 
behindhand in the accommodation it was able to afford. 

Help from the North was, however, again forthcoming 
in time to enable the Society to maintain its usefulness, 
and to continue the conversion of its mean and irregular 
tenements into the modest but respectable building that 
served until seventeenth-century benefactors provided 
funds for the erection of the existing quadrangles. No 
special bond of connection appears to have existed 
between Henry, Earl of Northumberland and the College, 
and his valuable gift of the rectory of Arncliffe in Craven 
in 1443 seems to have been the result of a letter from the 
University to the Earl* detailing the poverty of the 
College and a willingness on the part of the great 
Northern lord to benefit and assist in removing the 
difficulties of the old Northern foundation in the 
University. The conditions of his gift were somewhat 
similar to those attached to Skirlaw's foundation. 
Three Fellows were to be chosen from the diocese of 
Durham, Carlisle or York such as showed an aptitude 
for profitable study in theology. A letter from the 
University to Archbishop Kempe secured the necessary 
permission for appropriation of the benefice, and the 
Rector of Arncliffe died in 1451. 

In the Archbishop's license the needs of the house 
are given as the reason for appropriation, and the tale 
of poverty is again recited. 

' The rents and profits (proventus) with which the said 
College or Hall is at present endowed are in these days so 

* Trouble was afterwards experienced with the Earl's grandson, 
who, disregarding the grant of the rectory, instituted a Rector on 
a vacancy occurring, and he could only be persuaded to vacate 
the living on the grant of a pension by the College. 


slender and poor (exiles) that the Master and Scholars or 
Fellows are unable to be sustained by the same, or to bear 
the burdens falling upon them/ 

Either the EaiTs example or the public statement of 
the necessitous condition of the Great Hall stirred up 
other benefactors, and the valuable bequest of Dame 
Alice Bellasis in 1446, and a legacy from Cardinal 
Beaufort in the following year, furnished sufficient 
funds to justify a carrying on of the most urgent 
building operations. 

In 1447 Little University Hall was altered and 
improved at considerable expense to make it suitable 
for the Master's Lodgings. The entries in the rolls 
stating the price of labour might indeed be scornfully 
regarded by the operative of to-day, but they show a 
wider difference in value between skilled and unskilled 
labour than exists at the present time. 

About 1448-49 a new hall was built, the main room 
of the ancient Spicer Hall having up to this time served 
the purpose, but now being outgrown by the society. 
The new hall needed a butler, and about the time 
of its completion we find the limited staff of servants 
increased by a cellarius. 

Most of the minor benefactors of the College in the 
second half of the fifteenth century left their money on 
condition of obtaining the prayers of the community,* 

* The agreement between King Henry VII. and the College, 
February 20, 1492, for the celebration of Masses for the term of ten 
years on behalf of the soul of Anne, Countess of Warwick, is an 
instance of characteristic bargaining for an adequate return. The 
Master was to sing the Mass if he should be disposed to do so, and 
1 every poor scholar (of the ten) of the said College shall say, 
devoutly kneeling on their knees, between the elevation and recep. 



and with no further special injunction so long as this 
primary obligation was fulfilled. Dame Joanna Danvers, 
however, who seems to have interested herself in the 
work of rebuilding, left a 'notable sum of gold and 
silver" to aid the undertaking, and especially for the 
erection of a tower as a gateway and principal entrance.* 
This great work, undertaken probably to complete the 
improved arrangement of the buildings, must have 
been soon put in hand. In 1472 it was in existence, for 
in the accounts of that year considerable expenditure is 
shown to have been incurred 'in reparationibus circa 
turrim. 1 It, however, fell to Master Ralph Hamsterley, 
at the commencement of the next century, finally to 
complete this erection. Bereblock's rough woodcut 
shows us the completed work a strong battlemented 
tower of great breadth in proportion to its height, with 
a fine oriel window commanding the High Street. 
About the same time (i.e., after the erection of the tower 
in 1472) the chapel was enlarged and partially rebuilt, f 
The Bursars' rolls show considerable sums to have 
been spent upon it between 1475 and 1478. In April, 
1476, it was consecrated to the memory of St. Cuthbert. 
From A. Wood's account and small sketch here repro- 
duced, we are, able to define its position approximately, 
as having been about the middle of the present western 
quadrangle. The library was on an upper floor in 
continuation of the chapel westwards the whole 

tion of the most glorious and blessed body of Christ, "Ihu fili David 
miserere animae famulae tuae Annae nuper Comitissae," ' etc. 
* ' Pro aedificatione unius turris et principalis introitus. ' 
t In course of time the chapel was found to be too small for the 
members of the house, and a lower chamber under the library was 
added to make the outer chapel larger (Wood, ed. Gutch, 62). 



new building of freestone. The rest of the buildings 
were low, and the windows were not uniform, showing 
that the quadrangle was constructed at different periods. 
The west end and front of the old buildings were in 
Wood's time accounted the most ancient portion then 

The hall, or refectory (with chambers adjoining), 
stood on the east side of the quadrangle, and was not 
pulled down till 1669, or completely removed until 
1679, to make way for the eastern side of the present 
large quadrangle. 

In many of the chamber windows, says Wood, were 
divers * inscriptions, arms and rebuses, put up in memory 
of the benefactors thereunto/ Some of these had been 
before his time broken or taken away ; among them was 
a figure of King Alfred kneeling and St. Cuthbert 
sitting, with this inscription : 

' Hie in honore tui Collegium statui 
Quee statuisti in eo . . . maledico.' 

There was also a figure of King Alfred in another 
chamber window, holding in his hand the picture of the 
College, and a label with these words issuing from his 

mouth : 

' All free make I thee, 
As heart may thinke 
Or eye may see/ 

Happily, an account of the windows of the old chapel 
was preserved by A. Wood. We have also an earlier 
description of the arms in the College in the visitation 
of Richard Lee (Portcullis) in 1574, but as his MS., 
the 'Gatherings of Oxfordshire,'* belonged to Wood, 
* Printed Harleian Society, v. 99. 


it was probably made use of by him in framing his 

In the south window, over the side-altar, was a repre- 
sentation of a man in clerical vestments, with ' Wilhel- 
mus Dunelm 1 written below. 

In the second light, under a Bishop kneeling, was 
inscribed, ' Sanctus Johannes . . . socius istius. 1 The 
missing words, Wood was informed, had been ' Archiep. 
Ebor. quondam contuberms. 1 

In the upper part of the north windows, in the first 
light, was a figure of St. Jude, with an inscription in 
honour of Skirlaw. 

Under this was a picture of a Bishop, probably St. 
Cuthbert, and in the second light of the same window 
was the figure of a Bishop kneeling (probably Skirlaw), 
looking towards St. Cuthbert, with the inscription, 
' Ora pro nobis beate Cuthberte. 1 * 

At the bottom of the next window was, ' Orate pro 
anima Magistri Roberti Waldby quondam Archiepisc. 

In a lower window of the outer chapel, which had 
formerly been a chamber, were the arms of William 
of Durham, and an inscription (injured), 'Magistri 
Wilhelmi de Dunelm . . . hujus collegii/ The 
missing word here, Wood tells us, had been ' Fundatoris.' 

The College documents during the last half of the 
fifteenth century exhibit no signs of the strain of civil 
war through which the country was passing. Yearly 
accounts begin and end with the accustomed regularity, 
and no material change appears in the accounts either 
of rents and other receipts, or expenditure. At this 
time the sympathies of the house were probably Lan- 



castrian, for successive benefactions had made it a 
seminary devoted to the service of Northern scholars ; 
but amongst distinct partisans of the red or white rose 
the most notable alumnus of the College was John 
Shirwood, Bishop of Durham, who proved himself a 
zealous Yorkist, and played a prominent part at the 
coronation of King Richard III. 

Throughout the fifteenth century the tone and 
character of the Society of the Great Hall, as one 
instituted primarily for the study of theology, is main- 
tained on the lines of its original foundation, and new 
benefactors appear to tread in the footsteps of the old. 
Of the sixty-eight books presented by a former Fellow, 
Mr. William Asplyon, in 1473, a majority were com- 
mentaries on the Scriptures. The only works of a 
secular kind were Boethius de Consolatione and a 

In spite, however, of all the rules laid down by pious 
benefactors, some slackness in religious observance had 
crept in. One main object of the statutes passed in 
1476 by the Vice- Chancellor Thomas Chandler, and 
confirmed by Lionel Wydville as Chancellor, was to 
inculcate a stricter order in religious ceremony. The 
Fellows seem to have grown careless in the observance of 
festivals and manner of keeping holy days, and to correct 
such omissions and regulate the hours the new statutes 
were chiefly directed. Provision is also made for the 
constant attendance both day and night of at least one 
priest i.e., a Fellow in priest's orders and we are 
told that, through the frequent absence of Fellows in 
priests 1 orders, 'nonnulla scandala, magna pericula 
sunt sequelae et amplioria sequi videntur. 1 


The office of ' Master ' of the College, which in the 
fourteenth century we have seen growing gradually 
out of the position of senior Fellow, in the fifteenth 
becomes more important and assumes a definite shape. 
This gradual change came about through the need 
naturally felt for a head as officially representative, and 
probably also from the examples afforded by other Col- 
leges of the advantage of possessing a resident authority. 
Several of the earlier occupants of the post had been 
men of strong character, and likely to enlarge their 
position. The title of ' Master ' had at the beginning 
of the century become recognised, though the boast 
of Master Wytton (Wytton's Assize), that no other 
nomenclature had ever been made use of, is hardly 
correct, as the term ' Custos ' is found in several deeds 
both of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. 

Until Chandler's statutes of 1478, the Senior Fellow 
and Master were still one and the same person, the 
Master of the College only holding his office in virtue 
of his status as Senior Fellow. 

It may well be imagined that the advantages of 
seniority were discovered to be not always the best 
qualification for headship, and possibly Master Greg- 
forth, of whom we know little except that he was the 
last Senior Fellow who succeeded as of right to the 
mastership, may have been the example which led the 
University to enact that henceforth the Master might be 
chosen from any provided he was Socius et de gremis ac 
comitiva Collegii. The facts that he was now furnished 
with a special lodging,* that in legal documents he was 

* After the building of the tower the Master lived therein, and 
from this commanding position ruled the house until, in 1531, Little 
University Hall was given over to him for a hospitium. 


regarded as formally representing the Society, that under 
the Chandler statutes it is ordained that special respect 
be paid to him by the Bachelors, and that he was no 
longer to be constrained to perform the duties obligatory 
on other members, all go to show that by the end of the 
fifteenth century he had definitely established his posi- 
tion as distinct from, and superior to, that of the rest 
of the Fellows. 

The new ordinance enforcing a show of deference and 
respect from Bachelors may have been found necessary 
owing to the levity of those more youthful members 
who, both under Skirlaw's foundation and under special 
dispensations from time to time, had been admitted 
during the century.* Some of the Bachelors had, it 
seems, exhibited of late disorderly propensities, for by 
the new statutes of 1478 they were forbidden to wander 
in the town ' sine habitu vel collobio "* in order that 
the distinction of * Jew from Greek, and of collegiate 
from non-collegiate,' might be maintained. 

It was not only, however, against the laxity of the 
Juniors that the Chandler statutes were directed. The 
financial straits through which the College had recently 
passed were probably as much due to ill-management 
as to ill -fortune. Bursars had not always been ready 
or able to pay up arrears of accounts at the end of 
their terms of office, and it was now provided that each 
' Procurator ' (the term ' Bursar "* does not come into 
general use till after 1480) should be responsible for 
any arrears at the end of his term of office, and to 
make this more effective he was further called upon to 
provide a bond to secure any liabilities. By the middle 
* Such formal dispensations are found in 1420 and 1433. 


of the sixteenth century it had become so difficult to 
fill the post that a special ordinance had to be made by 
Chancellor Coveney (1561) to meet the difficulty, by 
depriving anyone properly elected who refused to serve 
of all emoluments until he should come to a better 

The admission of Bachelors brought about a change 
in the character of the Society, which gradually followed 
the example of more recent collegiate establishments 
in becoming an educational body rather than one 
dedicated to one especial kind of learning. So far the 
commensales appear to have been drawn from the class 
described in section xviii. of the statutes of 1292, and to 
have had as yet but little in common with the under- 
graduate of later times. They were generally ' Masters,' 
sometimes monks, and on two occasions rooms were 
rented for some length of time by neighbouring Abbots.* 
For the first time in 1441-42 we hear in the bursarial 
roll of a room occupied by * boys/f The cubicuH, which 
were not introduced till 1519, seem to have afforded a 
means of enlarging sleeping accommodation by the 
splitting up of existing chambers; these were let at a 
lower rate. 

So small and poor a College could not be expected to 
boast a large stock of plate. From an endorsement on 
a Bursar's roll, 1422-23, the amount is found in detail,^ 

* Abbot of Eynsham, 1466 ; Abbot of Sulby, 1421-22. 
f ' De earner^ in gardino pro pueris Mag. Tho. Botteler, 2S. 6d.' 
J First in the list comes a silver cup and cover ; then fourteen 
spoons coliaria, nine of which had long handles, five shorter, and 
twelve the arms of the founder; three cups with three lance- 
aria, one with two anscs, and a little basin newly made; six 
ancient candlesticks de auricalco, and three bought by Thomas 


and shows more luxury in living than might have been 

In spite of the narrowness of its resources, this small 
Society, in the fifteenth century, though at times 
numbering not more than six, and never exceeding 
eleven Fellows, justified its existence as a school 
originally devoted to the study of theology, by the 
number of distinguished Churchmen it sent forth. In 
this period the College claimed eight English Bishops 
as her sons, and among the more distinguished of these 
four were occupants of the See of Durham. 

Amongst the 'viri clariores' of the fifteenth century 
not mentioned in the text should be remembered : 

THOMAS LANGLEY : Bishop of Durham, 1406 ; Cardinal. 

WALTER HUNGERFORD : Fought at Agincourt, and was 
installed Knight of the Garter, May 3, 1401. 

ROBERT FITZHUGH : Bishop of London, 1431. His name 
appears as a camerarius in 1406, 1411,1412, 1414. His arms 
are recorded by Wood as having been on the old gate- 
way. He was also a member of King's Hall, Cambridge, 
and became Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. 

WILLIAM DUDLEY, Bishop of Durham : Graduated 
B.A. 1453, M.A. 1456; Archdeacon of Middlesex, 
November 16, 1475; Dean of Windsor; Bishop of Dur- 
ham, October, 1476; Chancellor of University of Oxford, 
1483; died November 29, 1483; buried in Westminster 

Benyngwell ; four 'salariade stanno cum coopteriis. 1 In the schedule 
of properties are also mentioned two new tablecloths bought in 
the time of Richard Wilton, ' pro alba mensa,' one of which is for 
principal days. 


ROBERT DE HUNGERFORD, Lord Moleyns. A camerarius in 
1435 ; a leader on the Lancastrian side, was taken prisoner 
at Hexham, and executed at Newcastle, 146*4. 

JOHN CHEDWORTH : Bishop of Lincoln, 1451 ; Died 1471 ; 
a camerarius in 15 Henry VI. ; was first a student at 
University, afterward a Fellow of Merton. 

ROBERT FLEMING : Dean of Lincoln, 1470 ; a, camerarius in 



Masters: Ralph Hamsterley, 1509-1518; Leonard Hutchin- 
son, 1518-1546; John Crayford, 154-6-1547; Richard 
Salveyn, 1547-1551; George Ellison, 1551-1557; 
Anthony Salveyn, 1557-1558; James Dugdale, 1558- 
1561; Thomas Caius, 1561-1572; William James, 
1572-1584; Anthony Gate, 1584-1597; George 
Abbot, 1597-1609. 

THE first election of Master under the Chandler statutes 
in 1509 led to much internal disturbance, and caused 
great dissensions in the Society. Up to this time the 
Masters, though not always the most distinguished 
members, had by virtue of the old rule of succession 
followed one another with seemly regularity. The party 
in the College who approved of the new rule of selec- 
tion sought to improve it on the death of Master John 
Rokysburgh, by choosing one for their Master who not 
only was no senior socms but was altogether a stranger 
to the foundation. 

The choice of the four Fellows present at the election 


fell on Ralph Hamsterley, formerly a Fellow of Merton ; 
but he was only chosen subject to a condition that a 
dispensation could be secured from the Visitors, ' quod 
fuit nunquam de gremio nostro neque de comitiva.'' 
The story of his election is told with some exactness 
in the College Register, and is interesting as exhibiting 
the formalities of the time. Hamsterley, with becoming 
modesty, was not in Oxford at the time of the election, 
but was residing at his rectory of Oddington. Thither 
one of the Fellows was despatched with news of the 
appointment. On this the newly-elected Master came 
to Oxford, and in quite the modern manner informed 
the Fellows assembled that he would only accept the 
honour on a unanimous vote. Master Peter Pierson 
to this replies somewhat ambiguously that if Hamsterley 
could prove himself a Fellow, or should the Visitors grant 
a dispensation, all present agreed to the election. Prob- 
ably Master Peter had friends among the Visitors, and 
entertained good hopes that the dispensation could not 
be obtained. 

With all solemnity on November 11 the Vice-Chan- 
cellor, Doctors in Theology, and two Proctors, met in 
the College chapel, and there granted the dispensation, 
but not unanimously. To make the matter certain, 
letters were sent to Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
and the confirmation of the election was deferred until 
his answer should be received. The Archbishop replied 
in favour of the election, and with threats of the prison- 
house for rebellious Fellows. This letter was read in 
the Congregation-house, ' in magna congregatione,'* and 
Hamsterley 's election was confirmed and promulgated. 
* On November 20, 1509. 


Some concession was made to opponents by agree- 
ment to a condition that after his death any succeeding 
Master should be elected de gremio, and that the 
Fellows for the time being should have powers of free 

On the same day, however, in the afternoon, the 
opposition party, consisting of the Proctors, some 
Regents, and Dr. Aschleby, held a rival congregation in 
St. Mary's, and strove to annul what had been done, and 
the fact that some of them worked for Master Barneby 
shows that this warm contention was by no means merely 
concerning the abstract principle of election. In con- 
sequence of the excitement and party spirit shown, 
Master Ralph was summoned to Lambeth, and there 
the case was heard on January 15, 1510. It was decided 
that Barneby had no just title. This unfortunate 
aspirant for office soon paid the penalty for his ambition. 
The hand of the new Master at once fell heavily upon 
him, and in February, 1511, we find a new Fellow elected, 
and a memorandum is made in the Register* that Barneby 
shall not have a chamber, commons, battels, nor in any 
way live with us, ' propter inquietationem studii et brigas 
et divisiones evitandas.'f 

On January 20, 1510, it was determined that in 
future Fellows on election should take oath that they 
would never ' accede 1 to another College of the University 
or of Cambridge as Fellows without the license of the 
Master or a majority of Fellows ; and we find in Novem- 
ber, 1510, license granted to Master Faulefield to accept 

* Reg. p. 8. 

t Mr. Peter Pierson appears to have made his peace, if he was 
ever in active opposition, for he was made Bursar in May, 1510. 


a Fellowship in another College should he chance to be 

Although Hamsterley won the day in the matter of 
his election, he seems never to have won the love of the 
recalcitrant Fellows, and throughout his term of office 
continual dissension prevailed between them. So violent 
grew the discord in 1512 that Dr. Wylford, the Vice- 
Chancellor, appointed a day (October 4) for a visitation, 
when he was fortunate enough, says Wood, to order 
matters so well that the contending parties ' departed 
in peace/* What the immediate quarrel was about is 
by no means clear, but it is evident that Hamsterley 
was of a masterful temper, and certainly he and the 
Fellows did not long remain at peace. In November 
of the same year we find the malcontents face to face 
with the Bishop of London ' in a certain inner Chamber 
within his Palace, and thereupon,' because of their 
rebellion against and disobedience to the provident 
and circumspect Master, 'sentenced to return to their 
studies and to pay for a whole week's commons out of 
their own purse.' A salutary hint was further designed 
by the Bishop to check in future any disposition to 
litigation, for he ordered the costs of the proceedings 
to come out of the pockets of the disputants. 

The fact that there are no entries in the College 
Register (inaugurated by Hamsterley on his appoint- 
ment) between the years 1512 and 1518, the year of the 

* That they ' departed in peace ' is rather too hopeful an expres- 
sion for the facts, for the disputants departed from the Vice- 
Chancellor's presence ' sub poena excommunicationis ut pendente 
termino nostrae visitationis prius assignatae inter partes praefatas, 
nullus eorum, neque Magister contra Socios neque Socii contra 
Magistrum facerent prosecutionem.' 


Master's death, and that during the. same period we 
find not a few entries of legal expenses in the College 
accounts, points to a continuance of hostilities. Still, 
in death there appears to have been reconciliation, for 
though his body was consigned to the chapel of his old 
College, Merton, a brass effigy was placed in his honour 
in the middle of the chapel of University, and the 
Society ordered that a solemn mass for his soul should 
be celebrated there ( in crastino sanctissimae Trinitatis. 1 

The agreement arrived at after the late Master's 
election, that the head of the house should in future be 
freely chosen by the Fellows from amongst those who 
were ' de gremio societatis ' was duly kept in the case of 
his successor Leonard Hutchinson. Though at one 
time a Fellow of Balliol, Hutchinson at the time of 
his election to the mastership was Senior Fellow of 

The new Master's unanimous election was followed 
by a long and peaceful term of office in happy contrast 
to the stormy state of discord prevailing under his pre- 
decessor. This period of twenty-eight years is almost 
devoid of incident ; the Register records little more than 
the due succession of Fellows, and the bursarial rolls 
show no unusual expenditure, no fresh accession of 

In 1524 Nicholas Ridley was elected to a Skirlaw 
exhibition, but the connection of the College with the 
Protestant martyr is but momentary, for the Register 
shortly adds, ' sed acceptare noluit.' 

The discipline of the house seems at this time to 
have been enforced with a light and tolerant hand, for 
when John Wright, a Fellow, was at last ejected in 1530 


(January 13) for continuous absence, this was stated to 
have lasted ' non solum uno termino sed duobus, tribus 
quatuor quinque et septem terminis. 1 In another case 
of prolonged absence, the place of Anthony Salveyn 
(afterwards Master) was only filled up after he had been 
treated ' speciali benevolentia.' In this period of easy 
government, it is not surprising to find the Master 
exhibiting an amiable partiality for members of his own 
family on the foundation. We find three Hutchinsons 
elected Fellows (John, George, and Hugh) between 1529 
and 1537. 

Building operations for the time being seem to have 
come to an end with the completion of the tower by 
Hamsterley, and the only important change in the 
arrangements during this period was the appropriation 
of that part of the fabric which had been Little 
University Hall for a ' Hospitium Magistri Collegii "* in 

Of Hutchinson himself little is known. His name 
occurs in the list of such as were reported to the King, 
in 1531, 'to be well learned and abiding in the 
University. 1 * Later, when the Sovereign's matrimonial 
difficulties seemed likely to find their only solution in 
emancipation from Papal jurisdiction, Hutchinson, 
along with three others, was appointed by Convocation 
to fortify the King's case by reporting the opinion held 
by the University on the limits of Papal authority 
during the WyclifFe controversy. His long term of 
office came to an end in 1546, when he formally re- 
signed, and retired to his living of Croughton in 
Northamptonshire, where he died and was buried. We 

* S.P.D., 22 Henry VIII., 6. 


have no clear evidence as to Hutchinson's views in the 
matter of reform, but probably he followed the tone of 
thought prevalent in the University, and was in sym- 
pathy with Calvinistic doctrine. 

His successor, John Crayford, on the other hand, was 
certainly an upholder of the ancient faith. The new 
Master, who was elected with unanimity, is a solitary 
example in the long list, of recourse being had to 
Cambridge for a head. His academic history had a 
curious commencement, but a distinguished conclusion. 
Ejected from his Fellowship in Queens'* College, Cam- 
bridge, he came to Oxford, where he was elected Fellow 
of University in 1519.* He soon, however, returned 
to Cambridge, where he was Proctor in 1522, elected 
Master of Clare Hall in 1530, and Vice-Chancellor for 
two years running in 1534, 1535. In this office he is 
said to have exhibited an overbearing temper, and to 
have been chosen ' of purpose with his rough spirit to 
bustle through much opposition ' (Fuller, 255). If it be 
true that on the occasion of a disturbance he cut off 
one man's hand, and seized and flung another out of 
the Regent House, there seems no doubt about his 
rough spirit, and sufficient reason for another author's 
remark that he was a ' better gladiator than Vice- 
Chancellor.'t In the Church Crayford was in favour, 
and held much preferment,^ and it is difficult to under- 

* Cf. Register. 

f Caius, Antiq. Univ. Camb. 

$ Crayford was a Prebend of St. Asaph, St. Paul's, Westminster, 
and Salisbury, Archdeacon of Bucks, Chancellor of Sarum, and 
held three rectories. He had been one of the committee appointed 
in 1540 who drew up ' the necessary doctrine and erudition for any 
Christian man,' printed May 29, 1543. He was an upholder of 


stand what led him to leave Cambridge and accept the 
mastership of University College. It was, perhaps, 
well that so rough-spirited a Master did not long 
continue in office. After a bare year's tenure, he 
died at his post in August, 1547 'brevi morbo con- 

Richard Salveyn, a member of an ancient Durham 
family, who had been elected a Fellow of the house 
in June, 1547, succeeded Cray ford. Though no sym- 
pathizer with Reformation doctrines, he held the 
mastership till 1557, when his retirement was probably 
brought about by the Royal Visitors of the University, 
though we are told 'per liberam resignationem viva 
voce demisit.'* 

Serious controversy now ensued on the election of 
a successor. The choice of the Society fell on one of 
their own number, George Ellison, whom they elected 
on November 30, 1551. 

The King's (Edward VI.) Visitors, however, amongst 
whom Richard Cox, Chancellor of the University, was 
predominant both from his office and his activity, 
designed the place for Thomas Caius, ' one that had 
hitherto conformed to all changes, and was now settled 
a true Protestant.'")* If this is an accurate description 
of Caius' mental attitude, it goes far to explain the 
support he received from the Visitors. He had been a 

the seven sacraments as doctrine meet to be taught,' and held 
that ' men were bound to confess them of their secret sins ' (Burnet, 
ed. Pocock, iv., 460). 

* Register, p. 9. 

t Caius' connection with Catherine Parr, for whom he had 
translated Erasmus 1 paraphrase of the Gospel of St. Mark, bears 
out the view that at this time he had ' settled a true Protestant.' 



Fellow of All Souls, and was at this time Registrar of 
the University and Public Orator. The Society, how- 
ever, succeeded in maintaining their choice against 
the influence of the Crown. This task was the more 
difficult because Cox, in his capacity as Chancellor, 
represented the ordinary Visitors of the College. An 
appeal was made from the decision of the Chancellor 
to the greater congregation. Here Cox asserted that 
he had a resignation made out to him in legal form 
by the late Master, but this proved of no avail, for 
Ellison's election was confirmed, and Cams'* rights and 
title 'if he had any 1 were adjudged to be taken 

That Ellison's sympathies were not with the Re- 
formers appears fairly certain from the fact that there 
was no change in the mastership on the accession of 
Queen Mary. He died in 1557 hecticd febre con- 
sumptus and was immediately succeeded by a devoted 
adherent of the Church of Rome in the person of 
Anthony Salveyn, a brother of the former Master of 
the same name. 

At the time of his election Salveyn was Master of 
Sherburn Hospital in the county of Durham, and held 
a stall in Durham Cathedral. His views were far too 
pronounced to permit him to retain his office under a 
Protestant Sovereign, and he resigned the mastership 
almost immediately on the death of Queen Mary. The 
following year he was deprived of his post at Sherburn, 
and confined to Kirby Moorside, whence he was for- 
bidden to pass more than five miles northward. 

In 1552 the members in College consisted of the 
Master, seven Fellows, and seventeen subgraduati 


(servants not being included). If we can judge from 
the part played by Cray ford, from the rejection of 
Caius, and the elections of Ellison and Salveyn, we 
must believe that the general sympathies of the body 
were with the old order rather than the new. This 
conclusion is further supported by the deprivation of 
Master Dugdale, who succeeded Salveyn, when in 
1561 he refused to acknowledge the Queen's supremacy. 
Even after this event the same spirit seems to have 
prevailed, for when William Hall or Hawle, Sub- 
Warden of Merton, and the leader of the old Catholic 
party there, was expelled that society after boxing the 
ears of the new Warden, he found a refuge, and seems 
to have been welcomed as a resident, in University. 

Both schools of thought were, however, represented 
in the College, and the Protestants reckoned among 
their number the very striking personality of William 
Holcot. Though a layman, he obtained a license to 
preach at the beginning of the reign of Edward VI., 
and in the pulpit was wont to appear ' wearing a 
velvet bonnet and damask gown, and sometimes a chain 
of gold about his neck.' Holcot's position as a country 
gentleman possessing considerable estate in Berkshire 
prevented his regular residence in the College, but he 
6 would retire thereto now and then to improve his 
knowledge in theology.'* His interest in this study 
got him into trouble on the occasion of the disputa- 
tion in April, 1554, between Cranmer and the divines 
representing the Universities. Holcot repaired to 
Bocardo (the gaol at the north gate) in the evening to 
supply the Archbishop with a book, wanted during the 

* Wood's Annals, ii. 129. 



day's controversy to verify a quotation, and was straight- 
way apprehended by the bailiffs. Later, ' treason was 
laid to his charge for the maintenance of Cranmer in his 
naughtiness. 1 * The fact that it was possible for such 
a man as Holcot to live in the College during the 
reign of Queen Mary, and to retain such pleasant 
recollections of his life there, that he made the Society 
a handsome bequest in money and books, is some 
evidence of a tolerant spirit and the absence of any 
violent form of partisan feeling. t 

The treatment of the reactionaries in the first two 
years of the reign of Elizabeth was generally fairly in- 
dulgent, but in Oxford there were not a few cases of 
deprivation. Amongst the number deprived was James 
Dugdale, Master of University. He was not present at 
the visitation by the Vice-Chancellor's Commissary on 
November 17, 1561, and as the Senior Fellow made 
oath that he had been duly cited, the Master for non- 

* Foxe, Acts, iii. 839, ed. 1634. 

f The phraseology of Holcot's will, under which he made his 
bequest to the College, is very curious. ' Therefore I now wish 
well that certayne of my said Hawks and Howndes, my books 
named within a bill being within my Geneva bible, be in time con- 
veniente conveyede to the mewes and kennells I mean the library 
of the Queen's College and the University College in Oxford, where 
I ones was to learn soo to Hawke and Hunt.' Then, after giving 
instruction for the use and preservation of the books, ' to make 
them more mindful thereof,' he leaves them 40 in gold, 20 to the 
Master and Fellows of the said University College, ' to bestowe it 
after this manner my name to be weekly enterde into their Buttrye 
book of battells, and the bible clerk or some other is to say daily at 
the master's tables after the last grace, " Lift up yr Harts, etc. Let 
us give thanks to ye Lord our God for Wm. Holcot. Resp. It is 
meete and right so to do." ' The masters of the College were gran ted 
toward amendment of their commons threepence each, the addition 
to be called ' Holcot's commons,' etc. (Smith : Transcripts, vii. 243). 


appearance was pronounced contumacious. The same 
day, an hour after noon, Thomas Caius was elected in 
his place. On this occasion no difficulty about the 
election seems to have been raised, and any question of 
breach of statutes was met by a dispensation from the 
Visitors. The new Master no longer held office as 
Registrar of the University ; on July 20, 1552, he had 
been dismissed because of neglect of his duties. The 
proceedings in great congregation on the occasion of 
his ejection showed that this quick and ready scholar 
had also a quick and violent temper. Caius refused to 
answer the articles brought against him, and in disgust 
at the proceedings prepared to leave before the sentence 
had been pronounced. He struck in the face a master 
who attempted to bar his exit. For this reprehensible 
conduct he was fined, and committed to prison by the 
Vice-Chan cellor, but very soon released, and his fine 
was reduced to a nominal penalty on condition that he 
apologized.* Probably his good scholarship gained 
him sympathy, for Greek scholars at this time were 
not plentiful, and the negligent Registrar had proved 
his ability by translating portions of Euripides and 
Isocrates.t At the present day Caius is remembered 
not for his shortcomings as Registrar, nor for his trans- 
lations, but as the doughty champion of the greater 
antiquity of his own University, eagerly challenging 
a rash statement of the Public Orator of Cambridge 
in his address to Queen Elizabeth, asserting the 
priority of Cambridge. Within a week Thomas Caius 

* Reg. Univ. Oxon. O.H.S., vol. ii., p. 81. 

t ' Knowledge of the Greek tongue was then so rare that it was 
scarce professed in public or private by anybody ' (Wood : Annals, 
ii- 135)- 


wrote in disproof his Assertio Antiqmtatis Oxoniensis 
Academics. A copy of this in MS. came curiously 
enough into the hands of another Caius, of Gonville 
Hall, Cambridge. He, John by name, published in 
1568 the Oxford man^s treatise as an appendix to his 
own book in support of the antiquity of his Univer- 
sity, entitled De Antiquitate Cantabrigiensis Academic?.* 
In his efforts to prove his case, Thomas Caius exhibited 
unquestioning fidelity to tradition rather than a spirit 
of critical inquiry. Whilst he omitted no fables, how- 
ever extravagant, concerning the early history of the 
University, he appears to have preferred not to avail 
himself of the less inspiring College documents which 
were ready to his hand. 

On the occasion of Queen Elizabeth's visit in 1566, the 
Oxford champion's work was presented to her by the Vice- 
Chancellor, but she appears, prudently enough, to have 
accepted in silence so controversial a volume. In the 
entertainment prepared in honour of the visit, the 
poverty of the College prevented much display, and 
nothing more seems to have been attempted than 
covering the buildings facing the High Street with 
copies of laudatory verses, which the Master was well 
able to compose, lamenting her departure.^ 

A very unsatisfactory state of things existed in the 
house at the time of Caius 1 election. The long absence 

* Both works were again reprinted in 1579, and Thomas Caius 1 
book, with annotations on the work of his adversary, was printed at 
Oxford in 1730 by Thomas Hearne. Some portions of the Oxford 
champion's work were made use of by a more industrious antiquary, 
Brian Twyne, for his Antiquitatis Academic Oxoniensis Apologia. 

t Mr. Pullyn was appointed ' orator ' to receive the Queen, but 
his services were not required, as she did not specially visit the 
College (Nichols: Progresses of Queen Elizabeth, 239). 


of the last Master had brought about further disorder 
in the slender finances. The office of Bursar, so far from 
being sought as an honour, was shunned as a peril. To 
force the unwilling Fellows to their duty, the Vice- 
Chancellor in 1567 ordained that if any Fellow 
properly elected to the office of Bursar refused to 
perform the duties, all emoluments should be withheld 
till he thought better of it. An attempt to enforce 
economy was now made by cutting off the commons 
and stipends of Fellows ' pro mensibus recreationum.' 

As might be expected from his conduct as Registrar, 
Caius did not greatly benefit the College by his 
administration of its property. His reputation as a 
scholar, however, served to encourage those under his 
control and tuition in something more than study of 
theology. Richard Stanihurst, the Irish historian and 
poet, matriculated in 1563, and contemporary with him 
as a commoner was William Addington, the translator 
of the ' Golden Ass. 1 About this time several members 
of the Society destined to distinction in the Church 
were following one another in rapid succession. John 
Best, afterwards Bishop of Gloucester, was elected 
Fellow in 1558 ; Toby Matthew, a future Archbishop 
of York, matriculated in 1559 ; twelve years later Giles 
Tomson, who became Bishop of Gloucester in 1612 ; 
and in 1595, Henry Ussher, afterwards Archbishop of 

Thomas Caius died in office perhaps none too soon 
for the financial prosperity of the College and was 
buried in the Church of St. Peter-in- the-East on May 20, 
1572. The choice of the electors fell now on William 
James. Again the statute requiring the Master to be 


' de gremio ac comitiva Collegii ' was broken, for James 
was Reader in Divinity in Magdalen College. This 
election did not, however, take place without a struggle 
among those most intimately concerned. The election 
was at first deferred ' ob magnas et graves causas ' 
signified by the senior, Thomas Cheive, to the Fellows. 
But James was in favour with Leicester, then Chancellor, 
and a special dispensation ' ab illustrissimo Comite ' 
having been obtained, he was declared duly elected on 
June 20, 1572. The selection was a most happy one, 
and in every way beneficial to the College, for the new 
Master immediately set about the task of putting his 
house in order, and so well succeeded that a few years 
later the Fellows of the Savoy, anxious to gain the 
services and to profit by the reputation and experience of 
such a skilled administrator, wrote to Lord Burleigh, 
begging for the appointment of James to the mastership 
of their hospital. ' His wisdom and policy in bringing 
to happy quietness the late wasted, spoiled, and indebted 
University College in Oxon, whereof he is now Master, 
doth not only give us hope of great good,' etc.* 

In retrieving the fortunes of his house and attaining 
the happy results thus described, James was assisted by 
two small but timely bequests of lands and tenements 
made to the College by Thomas Gold, of St. Giles 
and John Huet, in 1568 and 1570. Under the will of 
the latter the Crown Inn and certain meadows were 
left to found two readerships in Philosophy and Logic, 
and this is noteworthy as being the first provision 
formally made for the maintenance of a teaching staff. 
Financial pressure probably prevented the immediate 
* Quoted by A. Wood (Athena). 


application of the money, for it was not till 1583 that 
the readerships were established. 

James not only signalized his mastership by establish- 
ing the financial position of the College on a sound 
basis, but he was successful in placing the foundation 
on a more satisfactory legal footing, by securing from 
the Queen the first definite charter of incorporation. 
Though by various royal licenses to alienate in mort- 
main, dating from the second year of Edward III. 
onwards, the foundation had been recognised, up to this 
time such recognition had not been made in formal 
terms nor had the appellation of the College been 
clearly fixed. This was now accomplished by the 
Elizabethan charter, which, after detailing at con- 
siderable length the various styles and titles by which 
the Society had hitherto passed, lays down that in 
future they should be ' Unum Corpus re et nomine 
incorporatum solummodo per nomen Magistri et So- 
ciorum Collegii Magnae Aulae Universitatis Oxoniensis.' 
This somewhat cumbrous title, ' the College of the Great 
Hall of the University,' is to this day the proper legal 
designation of the Society, though in ordinary use it 
has given way to the more convenient expression 
* University College,' and this it has been found possible 
to still further abbreviate. 

Probably enough the fact that the Master was 
chaplain to the Earl of Leicester* made the procuring 
of the charter an easier matter than it otherwise might 
have been, and this connection was further of benefit in 
inclining Leicester to leave to the College by will a 

* He was present at Leicester's death-bed at Cornbury, in 
Oxfordshire, September 4, 1588. 


property in Wales (which we may conclude from the 
terms of the will he had probably never seen) for the 
maintenance of two scholars.* 

Several smaller bequests falling in about this time 
most opportunely assisted the Master in his uphill 
task. Among these minor benefactions were those of 
Simon Perrot, who left land and tenements in 1589, 
and Thomas Browne, Vicar of Basingstoke (but ' Wake- 
filiensis'), who left by will dated November 12, 1586, 
%50 because of his affection for the study of theology. 
There was also about this time a bequest under the will 
of the Earl of Bedford, which was never obtained, as 
the existence of the bequest does not seem to have been 
brought to the notice of the Society until the end of the 
next century. 

The establishment by James, towards the close of his 
mastership, of a regular teaching staff was perhaps the 
most beneficial of his reforms and improvements. When 
the royal visitation in 1535 had recommended a system- 
atic delivery of lectures in the Colleges able to afford 
the same, University was amongst the few unable ' from 

* Extract from Earl of Leicester's will, dated August, 1587 (copy 
in the Muniment-room) : And I have a fee farme parcel . . . 
which I will shall be employed to the mayntenance of two Scholars 
in the University Coll. in Oxford, allowing each of them by the year 
20 apiece. These scholars allwayes to be placed by my wife during 
her life, and after by hym that shall be left myne heir. This fee 
farme I have not the name of it, but the present rent is about fyve 
pounds a year, and worthe 50 or three-score pounds when the yeare 
be out.' 

In 1596 a commission of inquiry into the value of the estate was 
held by order of the Court of Chancery, and in 1618 the court 
decreed in favour of the College. 

An oil-painting of the Earl, attributed to Zucchero, hangs in the 
dining-room in the Master's Lodgings. 


scarcity in lands and revenues/ Now by a careful 
husbanding of resources and the help of new benefactors 
the College was provided with a regular organization 
for the purpose of teaching. In 1583 provision was 
made by special ordinance of the Master and Fellows 
for the appointment of a Dean and four Praelectors. 
The Dean was to take care that the scholars were 
present at prayers in the chapel and at the lectures and 
disputations in the hall. Of the readers, one, ' the 
catechista,' was to teach the scholars the ' principia et 
capita ' of the Christian religion, while the others were 
to lecture on the Greek tongue, philosophy, and logic. 

Too soon for the welfare of the College was this 
able administrator withdrawn from its service. In 1584 
James was made Dean of Christ Church, ' wherein he had 
received his first breeding,' and on September 14, 1584, 
he resigned the mastership.* His successor, Anthony 
Gate, is conspicuous as affording the first and last 
instance of a layman occupying the office. Though he 
was a Fellow of the College and had taken his M.A. 
degree thence, a dispensation was secured before his 
election because he was ' neque minister neque e gremio.' 
His election was confirmed on September 15, 1584. 
The absence of all remarkable incidents befalling in 
College history in the latter years of the reign of 
Elizabeth is almost certain evidence of a quiet 
prosperity. The flow of small but timely benefactions 
which began under the rule of the late Master continued 
under his successor, and John Freestones gift in 1592 of 

* James's reason for resignation is given thus in the Register: 
1 Quia non possum utrique muneri commode inservire. ' He was 
appointed Bishop of Durham in 1616 in succession to Toby 


property in and about Pontefract, to be devoted to the 
maintenance of one Fellow or two scholars, and his later 
bequest of ^?100 to be laid out in the purchase of the 
lease of the house on the west side of the then existing 
buildings, with a view to ultimate annexation, proved 
effective means of advancing the prosperity of the 
College. The year marked by the Freeston benefaction 
was a fortunate one, for in it two Yorkshire cousins, 
Charles Greenwood and James Radcliffe, entered their 
names, both of whom were in the next century to prove 
themselves noted tutors, and the first a considerable 
benefactor. The last year of Gate's twelve years of 
office (1596) was, however, the most famous, for in it 
Edward Herbert, afterward Lord Herbert of Cherbury, 
entered as a gentleman commoner at the early age of 
fourteen. The future diplomatist, historian, duellist, 
and poet, resided in Oxford for four years, two before 
and two after his early marriage perhaps too long a 
time in his later judgment, for in his autobiography he 
recommends but a year's reading in philosophy and six 
months' study of logic ; he further adds, ' I am confident 
a man may have quickly more than he needs of these 
arts. 1 

On the death of Gate in August, 1597, the Fellows 
without demur accepted and unanimously elected a 
new Master on the recommendation of Lord Buckhurst, 
then Chancellor of the University. The choice fell on 
George Abbot, Fellow of Balliol and chaplain to the 

The century had begun with a keen struggle as to 
the mastership, but by its end the power and influence 
of successive Chancellors had won the day, and the 


Fellows had come to elect on recommendation rather than 
at their own free will. This change held good till the 
middle of the next century, and, though interfering with 
the independence of the Society, proved on the whole 
beneficial through the general distinction of the 
nominees thus secured. 

The poverty of the foundation during the sixteenth 
as in the preceding century had continued to act as a 
constant check on its growth. As more and more came 
to be expected in the way of instruction from an 
educational body, so greater and greater became the 
need for more considerable endowments. Timely 
bequests already mentioned came to hand in the last 
thirty years of the century, but only of such a nature 
as to enable the Society to meet with difficulty the 
requirements of the day. The reputation of the College 
as a place of education was increasing ; a future 
Archbishop was its Master. New buildings were needed 
for housing growing numbers ; waiting for the buildings 
was one of the finest sites in a city of fine sites. All 
seemed ready for advance and growth provided the 
stream of benefaction, which had hitherto flowed so 
slender and so slow, could be increased in volume and 
in force. 

Amongst other alumni of the sixteenth century 
worthy of mention whose names have not occurred in 
this chapter were : 

OTHO HUNT: Benefactor; Fellow, 1559; Rector of 
Preston Bisset, Bucks, 1562, and of Methley, Yorks, 1569. 

FRANCIS TRIGGE : Theologian; Fellow, 1564; Rector of 
Welbourne ; author of various theological works, and 
founder of a library at Grantham. 


HENRY USSHER: Archbishop of Armagh (August, 1595); 
incorporated from Magdalene College, Cambridge, in 1572; 
B.A. and M.A. from University; died 1613. 

Sir GEORGE CROKE : Justice of the King's Bench ; M.A. 
from the College in 1575. 

THOMAS WENTWORTH : Author of the Office and Duty of 
Executors; entered in 1584 a commoner; Recorder of 
Oxford and Burgess for the city in various Parliaments. 

DUDLEY DIGGES : Master of the Rolls in 1 636 ; entered 
the College in 1598 ; was Ambassador to Russia in 1618, 
and to Holland in 1620 ; Author of the Defence of 
Trade, l6l5, and A Discourse concerning the Rights and 
Liberties of the Subject, 1642. 

HENRY TTLSON : Bishop of Elphin, 1639 ; Fellow, 1599 ; 
epitaph in parish church, Dewsbury, York. 



Masters : George Abbot, John Bancroft, Thomas Walker, 
Joshua Hoyle, and Francis Johnson. 

ABBOT, says Clarendon, was a man of 'very morose 
manners and very sour aspect, which in that time was 
called gravity.' Though Clarendon was prejudiced, the 
two portraits of Abbot in possession of the College bear 
out his description. Yet there is sufficient evidence 
that a kindly character lay beneath this rugged exterior. 
Sir Dudley Digges, who had proved himself a 'very 
towardly pupil,' kept on terms of affectionate intimacy* 
with him until his death. Influenced by like affection 
and confidence, Sir George Savile, who had married 
Wentworth's sister, on his death, left his son under 
his old Master's guardianship. Abbot was accounted 
a strict disciplinarian, but the College Register only 
gives details of reasonable exercise of authority. 

On October 17, 1608, we find the Master formally 

* 'He calleth me father,' wrote Abbot in 1627, 'and I term his 
wife my daughter. His eldest son is my godson, and their children 
are in love accounted my grandchildren.' 


convening the Fellows in chapel assembled for the 
purpose of examining into the misdeeds of James 
Harrison, the Bursar. Harrison was solemnly warned 
that the debts of the house owing at Michaelmas must 
be paid before Christmas, and was threatened with 
expulsion if he continued his visits to the King's Head 
and wanderings 'abroad at night." 1 About the same 
time also a Freeston exhibitioner is warned that his 
exhibition will be forfeited unless he can give satis- 
faction for ' delictis quibusdam et scandalis turpiter et 
contumeliose commissis.' On the other hand, the Fellows 
could not complain of any strict interpretation of the 
statutes with regard to residence, for leave of absence 
for periods varying from one to three years seems to 
have been freely granted, and these licenses are entered 
without any record of the reason. Despite the sneer of 
the Royalist historian, that Abbot as ' Master of one of 
the poorest Colleges in Oxford had learning sufficient 
for that province,' the Master was one of the most 
prominent men of his day in Oxford. The deanery of 
Winchester, to which he was appointed in 1599, made 
up for the slender emoluments of his Oxford office, and 
enabled him to discharge the duties of the vice- 
chancellorship in 1603 and 1605, the year of King 
James I.'s visit, with befitting dignity. He was the 
recognised leader in Oxford of the Calvinistic school 
of theology, and in growing favour at Court. The 
College could not fail to benefit indirectly under the 
headship of a Master of so strong a character and such 
increasing influence. 

In 1609, for the first time for nearly 100 years, 
University again supplied a Proctor in the person of 


Charles Greenwood.* Elected a Fellow on the Percy 
foundation, November 18, 1587, he acted as tutor from 
1598 to 1604, and from the happy influence which he 
exercised over his pupils, and the munificence which he 
later displayed, Greenwood proved himself a true bene- 
factor to his house. Some light is thrown on his 
character by a letter (dated December 29, 1633) from 
Lord Strafford to his nephew Sir William Savile, of 
Thornhill, in which he writes : 

' Consult Mr. Greenwood, who hath seen much and is 
well able to judge. He was the man your father loved and 
trusted above all men. His advice will always be upright, 
and you may safely pour your secrets into him. And I 
protest to God were I in your place I would think him 
the greatest and best riches I could or would possess.' 

Under Greenwood's care came in October, 1602, Simon 
Bennet, the second son of Sir Thomas Bennet, Lord 
Mayor of London, and the benevolent inclinations of 
the pupil, to whom the College was eventually to owe 
much, were undoubtedly fostered, and in some part 
directed, by the character and example of his tutor. 

On December 3, 1609, Abbot was created Bishop of 
Lichfield and Coventry, and two months later was 
translated to London. He did not surrender the 
headship until March 2, 1610, when his resignation was 

* Charles Greenwood was son of James Greenwood, of Hepton- 
stall and Greenwood Lea, by Cecilia, daughter of Charles Radcliffe, 
of Todmorden. Greenwood was presented to the rectory of Thorn- 
hill in Yorkshire by Sir George Savile, the father of one of his 
pupils, in 1612, but he did not resign his Fellowship until July, 1614. 
He is said to have preached often in St. Mary's, though ' a modest 
undervaluing of his own abilities, which, indeed, were very sufficient, 
did make him more unwilling to show himself in public ' (George 
Radcliffe' s Letters, p. 81). 



made with much formality before a public notary. 
Richard Bancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury, was at 
the time Chancellor of the University, and the appoint- 
ment of Master was practically in his hands. His 
choice fell on a nephew, John Bancroft, late student 
of Christ Church, and a dispensation from the statute 
having been obtained on his behalf, he was unanimously 
elected on March 7, 1609. 

The new Master was a capable administrator and 
effectively maintained the credit of the house. To him 
it is indebted for the commencement of the useful 
register of all leases and other deeds, and the keeping and 
entering up of which was provided for by a grant of 5s. 
remuneration per annum ' to one of the Fellows. 

Up to the beginning of the seventeenth century the 
College accounts had been kept much in the same fashion 
as in the fourteenth. For accuracy they depended on 
the honour and industry of the individual Bursar. As 
the number of members and amount of property in- 
creased, some further safeguard was thought necessary to 
prevent constantly recurring losses. A Bursar was in 
monetary difficulties in 1608. A like trouble is found a 
few years later, and we hear from a letter dated May 11, 
1613,* the news of Dr. Browne, who was Bursar in 1611 
and 1612, having died ' miserably and fearfully in a 
dead palsy, 1 and 'being found to be worth 15s. 2d., 
and 600 indebted to University College.' 

One of the main difficulties of the Bursars up to 
this time had been the gathering in of the sums due 
for battels, for which they were held personally respon- 
sible. To avoid this difficulty and enable their officer 

* See George Radcliffe's letter to his mother from Gray's Inn, 
May ii, 1613 (Radcli/e's Letters, p. 94). 


to secure payment a College ordinance was passed in 
March, 1612, making the unfortunate tutors respon- 
sible for the battels of those under their charge, out of 
their own commons and other emoluments, until the claim 
should be satisfied. This regulation had some good effect, 
but at a later period it was found necessary for the Bursars 
to provide ' sponsors ' for themselves to guarntee the 
accuracy of accounts and secure the balances due. 

A. Wood (A thence) speaks of Bancroft as being ' at 
great pains and expense during his mastership to 
recover and settle the ancient funds belonging to that 
foundation. 1 Existing College documents only give 
details of the Master's reforms in internal administra- 
tion, unless an entry in a Bursar's book of 1616 for 'A 
payre of gloves for the Lord Chancellor and a box to 
carry them in ' implies some business or threat of 
proceedings in the law-courts. 

Tutorial duties were at this time multifarious. After 
the passing of the ordinance just referred to, the tutors 
signed a formal declaration of liability for the discharge 
of the battels of those whose names they subscribed. 
Every detail of expense in the pupil's collegiate life was 
under the inspection and direct control of his tutor. 
The almost motherly care displayed in some of the 
accounts remaining in the College treasury is perhaps 
explained by the comparative youth of the ordinary 
undergraduate at matriculation.* So it is usual to find 

* The average age of entry at University in the first half of the 
seventeenth century is about fifteen. During the mastership of 
Anthony Gate three of his name, and presumably of his family, 
matriculated together at the very early age, respectively, of eleven, 
twelve, and thirteen. Edward Herbert (Lord Herbert of Cherbury) 
matriculated at the age of fourteen. 


details of outlay on his behalf which imply the status 
of a schoolboy : ' vamping his boots,' ' ribbon for his 
hat, 1 ' mending his suit,' ' making his gown.'* Medicine f 
is provided and pocket-money is doled out ; even his con- 
tributions in the College chapel seem to have been 
handed to him for the purpose by his tutor. Very 
close intimacy arose, owing to the performance of these 
parental duties during a period of three or four years, 
and lifelong attachments resulted. Jonas Radcliffe, 
whose virtues as tutor are described at length on a 
tablet to his memory in the antechapel,^ seems to have 
been especially well fitted for the post, which he filled 
from the beginning of the century to the time of his 
death in Oxford in 1626. 

The amusements of the undergraduate at this period, 
though not carried to excess, were sufficiently varied. 
Shooting with the long-bow was in high favour at 
University, the exercise being patronized both by 
Abbot and Bancroft. ' Our Master,' wrote George 
Radcliffe, May 28, 1610, ' loves shooting, and we must 
follow.' Bowls and ' prickes ' (a game like bowls) were 
frequently played, and maintained their popularity 

* Brilliana, Lady Harley, writes to her son in 1638: 'I like it 
well that your tutor has made you handsome clothes,' etc. (Camden 
Society, Letters of Brilliana Harley, p. 22) ; and May 7, 1639 : 
' If y r tutor does not intend to bye you silke stockens, etc., I will 
bestow a peare on you.' 

t Charles Greenwood (tutor) ' caused a pomander to be made 
for me by his direction (i.e., as a disinfectant against plague), and 
another preservative to lay to my harte ' (George Radcli/e's Letters, 
p. 41). 

J ' . . . fructum et usum eruditionis . . . quern ille nobilium 
juvenum animis moribusque informandis impendit, solertissimus 
morum architectus, et bonse mentis faber.' 


throughout the century ; and in 1673 Obadiah Walker 
recommends the exercise for young men as ' good for 
the reins, stone, and gravel. 1 * 

Most Colleges possessed a 'ball-court 1 in the seven- 
teenth century. University from a very early period 
possessed an attraction of this kind ; mention is made 
of the ' sphaeristerium 1 before the middle of the fifteenth 
century. In 1616 it is noticed as the tennis-court. 

Fees for lessons in dancing and fencing frequently 
occur in the accounts of the more wealthy students who 
were preparing themselves for the role of men of 
fashion. Of the general regard for exercise as necessary 
to health there is abundant evidence, but anything 
approaching the violence of modern athletics seems to 
have been unknown. ' If you use to swinge, 1 says 
Bril liana, Lady Harley, to her son Ned, at Magdalen 
Hall in 1638, 'let it be not violently, for exercise 
should be rather to refresh than tyer nature. 1 ^ 

In 1610 George Radcliffe, writing from the College, J 
tells his mother that ' the University is much reformed 
about drinking, long hair, and other vices, especially 
our house, out of which two have lately gone to avoid 
expulsion for drunkenness. 1 Smoking seems to have 
been regarded as an almost equally serious offence. On 
April 22, 1619, the Fellows met in solemn conclave, 
and warned Samuel Wilson, one of Lord Leicester's 
scholars and a bachelor, that he should not enter any 
house in the town ' ad potandum vel ad fumigandum 
cerebrum, 1 vulgariter vocatum, ' to take tobacco, 1 and that 

* O. Walker on Education, p. 70. 

f See Letters of Brilliana Harley, Camden Society, p. 13. 
J Letter, December 14, 1610, from University College (see Life 
and Correspondence of (Sir] George Radcliffe , p. 64). 


he should neither drink nor smoke in his room, or in 
other parts of the College, on pain of expulsion. 
Although under Abbot and during the early years of 
Bancroft's mastership some check may have been put 
on drinking, the reform does not seem to have been 
permanent, for a very few years later John Elmhirst, 
Fellow, Tutor, and Bursar, was in difficulties from the 
accumulation of ' beer scores, 1 for which he was liable. 
We find the first items in Alderman Smith's ' note for 
beer due from Mr. Elmhirst ' to have been large enough, 
and as time passed on they rapidly increased in amount : 
for four scores ending Lady day, 1629, the amount is 
^115 Is. 2d., but for four scores for the year 1635 we 
reach the alarming amount of ^211 6s. 3d. The 
example and general laxity of this easy-going tutor 
can hardly have been beneficial to those in his 

From a buttery-book of 1615 to 1631 we find the 
number of undergraduates to have been twenty-nine to 
thirty, with hardly any variation in this interval. 
The College servants are described as pmcerna, promus, 
biblwtliista, coquus, subcoquus, janitor, bakers and 
brewers. No growth in numbers, but the fact that the 
existing buildings were in need of repair, brought about 
a determination in 1620 to rebuild the front of the 

Bancroft had a love of building which later, when 
he became Bishop of Oxford, he was able to indulge in 
the erection of Cuddesdon Palace. He seems to have 
much desired to commence the rebuilding of the house 
during his mastership. Possibly he was encouraged to 
actually embark in this great undertaking by Robert 


Gunsle/s bequest, in 1618, of the rectory of Flamstead 
in Hertfordshire, for the maintenance at the College of 
four scholars, from Rochester and Maidstone schools. 
On November 12, 1620, an agreement was entered into 
with John Acroyde and John Bentley, the Halifax free- 
masons, for rebuilding the north side of the College from 
the east end of the Master's Lodgings, excepting the 
tower. This particular plan was, however, never to be 
carried out. It seems probable that about this time 
the intention of Charles Greenwood and Simon Bennet 
to benefit the College so materially as to render rebuild- 
ing possible on a larger scale, had been divulged, and 
in the matter of reconstruction their pleasure was now 

On August 23, 1632, Bancroft resigned the master- 
ship on his appointment as Bishop of Oxford. During 
the twenty years of his tenure any impression left on 
the College by the marked theological views of his 
predecessor had disappeared. Throughout his own term 
of office Bancroft had shown himself a moderate High 
Churchman, and when Laud became Chancellor in 1630, 
the Society was well prepared to fall in with the 
prevalent Arminianism, and does not seem to have been 
influenced by any traditional sympathy with the 
doctrinal teaching of its old Master, or with his deep- 
seated antagonism to the Laudian theories of Church 
government. This spirit had been shown in 1628, 
when they despatched a lengthy Latin letter of 
congratulation to Laud, the rising power in the Church, 
on his appointment as Bishop of London ; and, again, 
when the Chancellor was translated to Canterbury, the 
College, as ' Filia natu maxima, Collegium Universitatis, 1 


expresses satisfaction, and offers humble congratula- 

A new Master, Thomas Walker, was elected on 
August 31, 1632. The appointment seems again to 
have been made on the Chancellor's dictation ; a dis- 
pensation was granted by him and he duly ratified the 
election. Walker was intimately connected with Laud ; 
not only was he a member of St. John's College, but 
he married Jane Robinson, a niece of the future Arch- 
bishop. In spite of a savour of personal interest about 
the appointment, it was fully justified in the result, for, 
in the words of William Smith, in general a distributor 
of but scant praise, ' He was a person never to be 
named by the Fellows of that College without his due 
commendations'' (Annals, pref., xviii). 

In the first year of Walker's mastership occurred the 
death of Sir Simon Bennet, who had been advanced to the 
degree of Baronet in 1631. He married the daughter 
of Sir Arthur Ingram, but, fortunately for University 
College, had no family. His life was passed at Beach- 
ampton, Bucks,f an estate purchased by his father in 
1600, where he had made a great reputation for 
'maintaining a lavish hospitality. 1 In 1629 he had 
purchased from the King for 6,000 the estate of 
Hanley Park, originally within the precinct of Whittle- 
bury Forest, and containing 863 acres of old enclosure. 
This property^ he now left by will to University 

* The College did not, however, confine itself to empty compli- 
ment, as in 1632 there is an entry in the accounts of ' a paire of 
gloves for the Lord Bishop of London, 3 6s. 8d.' 

t See Lipscomb's Buckinghamshire, ii. 528. 

} The application of the bulk of the property, after the death of 
Lady Bennet, was settled by a decree in Chancery in 1640, enforcing 


College, reserving power to his executors to grant the 
profits of the estate for a time to the Master and 
Fellows for the purpose of rebuilding. Bennet's inten- 
tion had probably been for some time known to some 
of, if not all, the Fellows, but his death at so early an 
age could hardly have been anticipated. 

Charles Greenwood was not to be outdone in 
generosity by his former pupil, and, pending the time 
when the first returns from the Hanley estate could be 
secured, provided in his lifetime ^1,500 for the 
commencement of the great work of rebuilding. On 
April 14, 1634, the work was begun, but the short 
account of its character and progress is reserved 
for a future chapter dealing with the existing build- 

The numbers in College steadily increased after 
Walker's accession and the Bennet benefaction, and it is 
difficult to understand how increased accommodation 
was provided during the process of down-pulling and 
up-raising. These pending alterations must have made 
any entertainment impossible on the great occasion of 
the King's visit in 1639. The only outlay by way of 
preparation for a chance visit is of 10s. spent ' in 
whitening the old hall against the King^s coming,' and 
of c^lO for 'blew searge cushions and silke for the 
Chappel, 1 which latter expense was probably incurred 
rather out of respect for the Chancellor than in welcome 

a recommendation by Laud for the establishment of four Fellowships 
and four scholarships. This arrangement was reversed in 1649, on 
the application of the relations, and a special reservation was made 
in favour of founder's kin. On the Restoration, however, the 
scheme of 1649 was revoked, and the original Laudian proposals 
reverted to. 


to the King. Probably enough the Fellows were not in 
sufficient funds to make much more display on the 
occasion, for we know that about this time or soon 
after the College finances were in sore confusion. 

In 1637 serious deficits owing to Bursar Elmhirst's 
irregularities caused the passing of a College ordinance 
insisting on the nomination of two sponsors for each 
Bursar, taken ' from among the Masters, 1 to guarantee 
the College against possible losses. 

The defaulting Bursar, whose letters prove his easy, 
careless good nature, pleads his ' ill-husbandry, careless- 
ness, oversight, kind-heartedness, or whatever you may 
please to call it.' All his creditors were not so long- 
suffering as his own College, and a threat of one indignant 
creditor c to make him see the Parliament ' frightened 
him considerably, and he writes to the Master in 1641, 
* for I had loath there be sifted where they winnow with 
a whirlwind,' and expresses his wonder that ' the man 
should be so transported as to wish both against discre- 
tion and charity.' The stress of the times and the 
rapid succession of events of absorbing interest possibly 
saved Elmhirst from his importunate creditors, and it 
is not until 1657 that we find a note of ' the pricing of 
his goods, his books, and bedding.' Even under this 
drastic treatment the habits of the jovial but imprudent 
Bursar are unchanged, and ' given him a bottle of sack, 
2s. 6d.,' is the last entry regarding him. 

During the eight critical years preceding the struggle 
in arms between King and Parliament, the attention 
and energies of the Society were concentrated rather on 
their building operations than political concernments. 
But the work was still uncompleted when the rapid course 


of events in 1642 turned men's thoughts from all minor 
business to the dreadful realities of civil war. 

The political bias of the great majority of the house, 
from the Master downwards, during the great struggle 
was never doubtful. The King's appeal to the University 
for assistance in money, dated from York, July 7, 1642, 
was promptly enough met by Walker, in whose hands 
the control of the College finance seems now to have 
been unreservedly placed. 

For lack of other available means, the bulk of the 
College plate was pawned, on July 21, to one Thomas 
Saunders, for an advance of ^150, and that sum, the first 
from any Oxford College, was immediately despatched 
to the King.* From a schedule of plate dated 1634, 
there seems then to have been some 1,200 ounces in all, 
about 400 ounces of which were in use in the Master's 
Lodgings. Probably a considerable portion of this was 
packed in the ' large wainscot box with lock and key "* 
which appears in Walker's private account to have been 
bought for the purpose, and now handed over as security 
for the loan. 

The balance of the plate, for the moment retained, 
comprised the Communion vessels, the Fellows' bason and 
ewer presented by Thomas Radcliffe, and the ' Parlia- 
ment ' bowl. This seems to have been hidden in a pri- 
vate house on the approach of Lord Say. It was there 

* The form of the royal receipt is worth noting : 

1 July the 3oth 1642. 

1 Received the day and year above-said of the Master and Fellows 
of University College the sum of One Hundred and Fifty Pounds 
for his Majesty's use according to his letters directed to the University 
of Oxford I say so much received 

4 per me RICH. CHAWORTH. 


discovered, confiscated (along with the plate of Christ 
Church)* on the ground of concealment, and sent up to 
London. It would appear that the pledged plate was 
subsequently redeemed and handed over to the King^s 
receivers at the beginning of the following year, for 
there is a mint receipt dated January 17, 1643, acknow- 
ledging 61 lb. 6 oz. 5 dwt., of an estimated value of 
190 4s. 2d. 

Thomas Walker, the Master, and Obadiah Walker, 
who had been Bursar during the years 1641 and 1642, 
were among the delegates appointed by Convocation, 
September 1, 1642, to consult and provide for the safety 
of the University. This body was known among the 
undergraduates as the Council of War. The fact that 
so small and poorf a College supplied two of the dele- 
gates exhibits plainly the prevailing spirit, which was 
undoubtedly in favour of the Crown. 

From the date of the King^s arrival in Oxford, on 
October 29, 1642, six days after the Battle of Edgehill, 
to the surrender of the city, there are but few facts to 
record specially bearing on the history of the College. 

The Register gives little or no information on the 
events of the time. Continually recurring leaves of 
absence to Fellows are the main entries in 1642, 1643, 
1644, but it is to be noted that the keeping of the 
Register was never abandoned, and that during this 
period five new elections were made to Fellowships and 

* A note by B. Twyne, quoted by A. Wood, speaks of it being 
found in the house of one Thomas Smith in St. Aldate's. 

f When it was agreed in Convocation, on September 6, that 
1,000 should be raised out of the several Colleges in such propor- 
tions as had been used on the occasion of public days, University 
College was rated with the lowest in amount. 


scholarships. There is no evidence of any interruption 
in the life of the society, even of a temporary kind. 
Numbers in the years dating from March, 1644, 
to March, 1645, and from May, 1645, to May, 1646, 
ran down to a very low ebb, and in those years the 
redditus cubiculorum is returned as ' Nil. 1 

Though the Bursar's account shows the income from 
land to have diminished between 1636 and 1640, the 
Parliamentary order* that rents shall no longer be paid 
to the Colleges seems, in the case of University, to have 
been practically disregarded, for the ordinary rents 
between 1642 and 1647 were paid without any remark- 
able variation, but receipts from extraordinary sources 
nearly disappeared in 1646. It has been often re- 
marked that the war did not materially affect business 
relations, but, all the same, it seems surprising to find 
the College in the middle of the disastrous year 1646 
calmly distraining for a portion of the Arncliffe tithe 
and securing the money in safety. 

The Master's private account -book for the period 
gives some idea of the part which even a small Oxford 
College was expected to take in the work of defence. 
Here we find items of expenditure ' for the raising of 
the bulwarks,' the < maintenance of soldiers,' and ' laid 
out in ammunition.' All between the age of sixteen 
and sixty were called upon to take up pick and spade 
and work on the earthworks or pay for substitutes, and 
the first of the above items probably relates to the cost 
of substituted labour. Private persons were invited to 
receive soldiers into their houses according to their 
means, and University appears to have responded to 

* April, 1643. 


the best of its power by the maintenance of twenty- 
eight troopers for several months.* Considerable sums 
were spent in ' provisions against the two sieges ' that 
is, for the unsuccessful fifteen days 1 siege by Fairfax 
and Cromwell in the summer of 1645, and for that 
which resulted in the final surrender. 

Besides taking a part as a contributory in the contest, 
the College was well represented in the field. In the 
muniment-room is a list of the members who took up 
arms for the King. Among the more distinguished of 
these may be named Sir Philip Monckton (of Cavil 1 and 
Holroyd in Yorkshire), Sir Thomas Lunsford, Sir Henry 
Chicheley, James Washington, Conyers D'Arcy, Francis 
Goring, Richard Thornhill, all Colonels of regiments in 
the royal service. Armigeri and plebeii occur indis- 
criminately in the list, most of them holding commis- 
sions, but some few serving as ordinary troopers. Among 
these was Thomas Henshawe, who in after-life proved 
himself a skilled diplomatist in the service of the Crown- 

The College chroniclers have not thought fit to pre- 
serve the names of those who may have served the Parlia- 
ment. There were some, but probably a small minority 
compared with the Royalist partisans. Of these the 
most notorious were Henry Martin, and William Say,f 

* A letter similar to that sent to other Colleges was received from 
the King inviting the undertaking of the maintenance of foot-soldiers 
at 43. a week for one month, and assuring the Society, upon the 
word of a King, that ' this charge shall lye on you but one month. ' 
The King in his letter says: 'We expect this supply from "par- 
ticulars, not from the public stock, which we believe to be exhausted 
already for our ayde." ' 

f Martin entered the College as a gentleman commoner, 
October 31, 1617, and took his B.A. degree in 1619. He was 
excepted from the Act of Indemnity, and imprisoned for life, first at 


regicides. Martin was a Colonel in the Parliamen- 
tary forces and Governor of Reading. He was a well- 
known and popular character in the Long Parliament, 
where he sat as M.P. for Berkshire, the fact that he 
was ' an incomparable wit for repartees ' perhaps 
making up for his shortcomings in being as ' far from a 
Puritan as light is from darknesse. 1 

The surrender of the city took place on July 25, 
1646, and on the face of them the conditions were 
highly honourable both to the garrison and the Univer- 
sity. The former were to march out with all accoutre- 
ments and with banners flying, and the rights and 
possessions of both the University and the Colleges 
were saved under a special article in the terms. The 
concessions made to Oxford as a seat of learning were 
probably due to the kindly sympathy of Fairfax. Other 
members of his party had but small intention of suffering 
either Colleges or University to enjoy their so-called 

The years immediately following the surrender con- 
stitute a period of hopeless unsettlement in Oxford life. 
In the town Cavaliers and courtiers were exchanged for 
Parliamentarian soldiers and Presbyterian preachers com- 
missioned to complete the work of conquest by the art of 
persuasion. In Latin doggerel verse* a Royalist poet 

Windsor, then in Chepstow Castle, where he died, September 9, 
1680. Say matriculated in 1619. 

* ' Calcavi atrium quadratum 
Quo juvenum examen 
Confluxit olim : video pratum 
Quod densum tegit gramen.' 

Ruslica Academic Oxon nnper Reformats 
Descriptio, by John Allibond, 1648 
(Somers Tracts, v. 502). 


sings of grass-grown courts and empty quadrangles.* 
Most of the Fellows were absent, and such as remained 
sullenly awaited the Parliamentary visitation. The 
process of visitation, under Order dated May 1, 1647, 
was met with strenuous resistance and thwarted by 
every ingenious device calculated to gain time. On 
June 1, 1647, Convocation appointed delegates, of 
whom Obadiah Walker was one, who were empowered 
to answer the Visitors on their behalf, and who drew up 
reasons for refusing to take the tests to be imposed, i.e., 
the Solemn League and Covenant, the Negative Oath, 
and the Ordinances of Discipline and Worship. The 
Committee for Reformation of the University sitting at 
Westminster was, however, of a temper not to be trifled 
with, and in November cited before it the leading 
' malignants ' in the University. Thomas Walker was 
among those cited to appear, but excused himself by a 
physician's certificate ' by reason of his infirmity. 'f As 
to the gravity of his ailment we have no evidence, 
but his name did not appear in the list of those 
delegated by Convocation in June, where, considering 
his previous activity as a Royalist, it is natural to 
look for it. 

Tiring of the resistance to their Commission, the 
Parliamentary Committee accelerated proceedings by 
ordering the sending down more troops in order to 
enforce obedience to the visitation. This rude form of 

* The average number annually entering the College on matricula- 
tion had been about ten; but during the years of the war these 
numbers are gradually reduced till they vanish altogether. In 1642 
there were five entries, in 1643 one, in the next three years none. 
In 1647 the recovery commences, and we find two newcomers. 

t A. Wood, Annals, iii. 533. 


pressure was sufficient to bring the various Colleges 
before the Visitors as they were summoned. 

On May 18, 1648, the date also fixed for the appearance 
of the members of Balliol and Jesus, eight Fellows only 
appeared to represent University. These were equally 
divided in their answers to the searching interrogatories, 
four expressing in various terms their inability to 
submit, and the remaining four making unqualified 
submission. Obadiah Walker expressed himself as 
' being not yet satisfied that he might submit to this 
visitation.* 1 Richard Washington was the leader of the 
Parliamentarian party in the College ; he had been 
elected Fellow in 1626, but left Oxford for Dublin, 
where he became Provost of Trinity in 1640. On the 
outbreak of the Irish Rebellion he withdrew from his 
post, and was readmitted to his Fellowship at University. 
Although his political opinions were well known, he was 
made Bursar in March, 1646. His answer reads thus : 

' I do freely and conscientiously submit myself to this 
visitation authorized by Parliament, as I think I ought to 
do, and as I have done formerly in another kingdom to a 
like visitation sent from the Parliament there to the 
College where I then lived.' 

The Master does not appear to have entered an 
appearance before the Visitors, but there is little doubt 
as to the answer he would have given. On July 8, 
1648, Obadiah Walker, Henry Watkins, and Thomas 
Silvester were expelled the University, and two days 
later the Master was removed from his office. There is 
a note in his handwriting inserted in the Register at 
the Restoration in which he gives vent to his indigna- 



tion : ' Mense Julii die x, 1648, amotus est Doctor 
Walker hujus Collegii magister legitimus per visitatores 
illegitimos. 1 Joshua Hoyle, a friend of Washington, 
and lately Professor of Divinity in Dublin, was put in 
Walkers place on the day of his ejectment. 

Hoyle, who had been a Fellow of Trinity (Dublin), 
seems to have returned to Oxford from Dublin about 
the same time as Washington, and was among those who 
rendered active assistance to the Visitors. By them he 
had been appointed (July 5) a member of the committee 
for the examination of candidates for Fellowships. He 
was made Regius Professor of Divinity in September, 
1648, and was a member of the Westminster Assembly 
of Divines. The new Master soon discovered that there 
was more of honour than profit in his office. The value 
of the headship was returned to the Visitors as being 
but 30 per annum for 'dyett and stipend.' They 
reported the insufficiency of this amount to the 
Committee of Lords and Commons, and recommended 
that some order should be made to ' save the Doctor 
aforesaid from those debts which are cast upon 
University College. 1 An attempt was made by the 
Visitors to grapple with the financial strain in this 
particular case by an Order of October 19, 1649, that 
in consideration of the debts of the College 'three 
Fellowships should continue void for the payment 
thereof. 1 But they seem to have found it difficult to 
adhere to this prudent resolution, owing to the pressure 
put upon them to oblige their friends and supporters in 
Parliament in the matter of Fellowships. 

The main feature of the Parliamentary period in the 
administration of the Colleges is the absolute depriva- 


tion of self-government, and subjection to the control 
of an external body, in its turn governed by the 
Parliamentary Committee in London. 

In University, the Master, five Fellows, seven scholars, 
the Butler, and two others, probably commoners, were 
expelled between July 8 and October 17, 1648, most of 
them not appearing to answer the Visitors 1 interroga- 
tories. Most of these places were now filled without 
any pretence of formal election, on the strength of the 
Parliamentary Order of July 2, 1646, inhibiting elec- 
tions to places of preferment ' till the pleasure of Parlia- 
ment be made known therein. 1 

The formula usually inserted in. the Register runs as 
follows : ' Whereas the Committee hath not yet declared 
the said College to be in a capacity of making their 
election in a statutable way, and being informed of the 

piety and sufficiency of learning of ,"* etc. ; and 

this is repeated till 1655, when, in November, the 
first free election by Master and Fellows was again 
made. In this interval on several occasions the Society 
appears to have made a struggle for independence. 
Thus in June, 1651, the Visitors declared the election of 
Matthew Bee by the Fellows to be void, but never- 
theless elected him themselves. In November, a letter 
having been received from Cromwell, then Chancellor 
of the University, in favour of John White, the 
Master and Fellows elected him, but the Visitors 
annulled the election on the ground that Cromwell had 
been deceived 4 by untruths contained in a Petition. 1 
The absolute control of the Committee was extended to 
the appointment of servants, for when in January, 
1652, the College ventured to choose a manciple, the 



appointment was immediately declared void, but never- 
theless formally remade. 

The Master, Joshua Hoyle, died on December 6, 
1654. and was buried in the old chapel, which was 
still standing. He filled the office at a very difficult 
time not unworthily. 

The zealots of the Restoration might well have left 
untouched the entry in the Register, ' Domino spiritum 
reddidit, 1 but this seems to have been regarded as open 
to question, and was altered to ' Fatis cessit.' There is 
evidence to show that Hoyle was of a tolerant temper 
unusual in his party. The fact that the learned 
Abraham Woodhead, though ejected from his Fellowship, 
was permitted to retain chambers in the College, and 
was consulted by the Visitors in conjunction with 
the Master and Fellows on more than one matter of 
difficulty, implies an absence of the bitter party feeling 
which prevailed in many Colleges. 

Hoyle^s death gave rise to an interesting struggle for 
the mastership, and colour is added to the records by 
the intrigues of Ezreel Tonge as shown in his letters. 
Tonge had entered the College in May, 1639. He had 
a considerable number of friends in Parliament, and 
was the first Fellow put in by the Visitors, July 14, 1648. 
He had served as Bursar in the year 1650-51, but 
vacated his Fellowship in 1651.* Throughout he seems 
to have entertained an ambition for the mastership. 

* The reason for Tonge's practical expulsion is not clear. It 
may have been on account of his marriage, which took place in 
1649, to Jane Simpson, daughter of Dr. Simpson, Rector of Pluckley 
in Kent, to which rectory he succeeded ; or perhaps it was owing 
to his unwillingness to assent to the Independent engagement in 


Some weeks before Hoyle's death Tonge obtained a 
letter to the Vice-Chancellor from his Parliamentary 
patrons, who, amongst others, included Thomas Wid- 
drington, John Lilburne, Thomas Harrison, and Robert 
Kilburn, with the intention, apparently, of confining the 
choice of Master to the Chancellor, and of checking any 
claim on the part of either the Visitors or the Fellows 
to elect to the post. Tonge appears to have followed 
this course, 4 knowing ye little respect the Fellows of 
the College did bear him ' (Rawlinson, D. 107) ; but if 
he put his trust, as seems likely, in the Protector, he 
was disappointed in the result. 

Some correspondence between Ezreel and the Master 
and Fellows in 1652 shows that, as W. Smith puts it, 
6 there was no great love or amity among these new 
intruders. 1 The ex-Bursar repeatedly demands a sum of 
money for items due to him during his term of office, 
most of which he says he might have recovered long 
since had he not been desirous to know ' whether love 
and Christianity would prevail with such as understand 
right and wrong. 1 One particular, ( my sword and belt 
which cost me 17s. Gd.,' and which seem to have been 
left behind, is made much of, and an offer on the part 
of the College to settle the claim for 4s. is indignantly 
repudiated. Later episodes in the life of this worthy, 
who figured as a witness at the trial of the Regicides 
and ended his chequered career as the dupe of Titus 
Gates,* exhibit him as a character * so active in his own 

* In 1679 Tonge introduced the narrative of the alleged Popish 
plot to Danby, and about this time had several interviews with the 
King. Weak and credulous, he probably at first seriously believed 
in Gates, from whom, however, he soon attempted to dissociate 


concernments ' as to have been altogether unsuited for 
the headship of a college. 

When they became aware of Tonge's manoeuvres, the 
Fellows, roused to action by the dreadful possibility of 
so undesirable a head being foisted upon them, met 
hurriedly, and, disregarding alike Chancellor and 
Visitors, elected Thomas Thornton (a Fellow put in by 
the Visitors on May 29, 1651). The election was 
approved by the Vice-Chancellor and Doctors, but on 
the motion of George Gale, the Senior Fellow, and 
another, an appeal to Convocation was allowed. . Sub- 
sequent events show the authority by which the affair 
was brought to a conclusion. A letter dated Decem- 
ber 18, 1654, from Vice-Chancellor Owen to the 
Protector, explains and excuses his conduct, and 
concludes, fi expecting your Highness 1 further direction 
for our future proceeding.'* The direction was not long 
in coming. The recent election was ' nulled by power 
then in being,' but the deprived Master was treated 
with consideration, and granted by Cromwell the 
rectory of Wheathampstead.t 

Francis Johnson, Fellow of All Souls, one of 
Cromwell's chaplains, was his nominee for the post, and 
consequently became the new Master. 

Under the date April 5, 1655, we find in the Register 
the beginning of an entry by George Gale, Senior 
Fellow, as to the election ; but the writing stops 
abruptly and the rest of the page remains blank, as if 
the Society had suddenly recognised the fact that they 

* Ex Reg. Convoc., p. 259, quoted in W. Smith's Transcripts, 
xi. 222. 

t 5. P. Dom., August, 1660. 


had but little voice in the matter. Another recom- 
mendation was now also made by ' His Highness ' in 
favour of Richard Griffiths, who thus stepped into 
Tonge's Fellowship, which had been ordered to be 
left void toward payment of the debts of the College 
till March 27, 1655. 

Difficulties naturally consequent on the almost entire 
change in the governing body had, in the case of 
University, been aggravated by a recurrence of law- 
suits. Litigation, indeed, seems to have been an almost 
invariable consequence of benefactions. Mention has 
already been made of the reversal of the decree in 
Chancery dealing with the Bennet foundation, and the 
settlement of this somewhat complicated matter was 
the source of constant trouble and endeavour to the 
Visitors during the Commonwealth period. 

So great was the financial embarrassment, that both 
Master and Fellows, as appears from an order of 
Visitors in 1649, were temporarily out of residence from 
an insufficiency of means. The College further engaged 
in an unsuccessful struggle with Anthony Foxcroft, the 
acting executor under Charles Greenwood^s will. Besides 
the benefaction made in his lifetime, Greenwood had 
left provision by will for the endowment of two 
Fellowships and two scholarships. A lengthy and 
expensive litigation with the Yorkshire executor, the 
details of which are obscure, led to an unsatisfactory 
result, and the further intended benefaction was lost. 

Of the Fellows and scholars put in by the Parlia- 
mentarian Visitors, none attained great distinction. 
Tonge was perhaps the most notorious ; among the 
rest, Rowland Stedman, appointed scholar in 1649, and 


Richard Griffiths, became Nonconformist divines of 
some note. William Squire, the first Fellow to be 
again formally elected by the College in 1655, became 
well known as a polemical theologian. 

The newcomers were, however, by no means such mere 
predatory interlopers as they have been represented.* 
They fell in easily enough with the spirit of collegiate 
life, and did what lay in their power for the benefit of 
their house. From the year 1651 onwards, efforts were 
made by individual contributions to replenish the 
empty plate-chest. Tonge set the example by his gift 
of a 20-ounce tankard. In 1655 and 1656 a determined 
and successful attempt was made to raise by voluntary 
subscription the amount necessary to complete the 
building of the Hall. The money was got together in 
nearly sixty different contributions, varying from 1 
to 50, and the work was accomplished in 1657. 

The reappearance in the accounts for 1656 of the 
item ' pro solatiis,' on the occasion of the annual 
gaudies on Trinity and St. Cuthberfs Day, is a small 
indication of the revulsion of feeling in men's minds in 
favour of re-establishing immemorial customs which 
had been suppressed as superstitious in the early days 
of the Commonwealth. It is quite possible that 
by the time of the Restoration Master Francis 
Johnson and his Fellows would have been quite 

* Wood sneers at the intruders generally (Athena, vol. iv., p. 300), 
contrasting the liberality of the President of Magdalen College, 
displaced in 1648, restored in 1660, with that of those ' who had 
been thrust into his office by the Parliament and Oliver for their 
saintship and zeal to the blessed cause, and gave not a farthing, but 
raked and scraped all they could get thence, as the rest of the saints 
did in the University.' 


prepared to accept the new order of things, but such an 
opportunity was not given them. 

In July, 1660, there was another, but this time a 
royal visitation. The process of re-establishment of 
the old officers seems, in the case of University, to have 
been effected with dignity and deliberation. On 
July 31 the allegation that Thomas Walker had been 
unduly ejected in 1648 was formally made before the 
Bishop of Oxford, sitting as royal Visitor in the House 
of Congregation. The next day the same allegation 
was repeated (by Hirst, acting as procurator for Thomas 
Walker) in the presence of Francis Johnson, who was 
interrogated 4 by what right or title he possesseth the 
Master's place.' The poor Master,* who, according to 
Calamy, was ' not gifted in elocution,' declared that ' he 
was put in there by Oliver, Lord Protector, and the 
Lords and Commons, which was then the supreame 
power.' This was enough for the Commissioners, who 
pronounced him unduly and illegally admitted, and 
restored Thomas Walker to his old place.t 

* Francis Johnson died in London on October 9, 1677 : a eulogistic 
sermon entitled The death of God's Moses's considered ' was 
preached on the occasion of his funeral by J. LI. In this the 
preacher describes the late Master as 'in his last winter stormy 
night, of trouble and persecution being indeed inveloped in the cloud, 
as if quite set ... yet in fairer times as giving as great a light in 
his lesser sphere as did Moses in his greater.' 

t A full account of the proceeding is entered in the Register in 
the handwriting of Walker. 



Masters : Thomas Walker, Richard Clayton, and 
Obadiah Walker. 

4 THE scene of all things is now changed, and altera- 
tions made in the countenances, actions, manners, and 
words of all men,' wrote Anthony Wood of the effect 
in Oxford of the Restoration (Annals, iii. 697). The 
changes brought about at University were not, how- 
ever, so considerable as might have been expected. A 
few weeks after the reinstatement of the Master, three 
of the ejected Fellows Abraham Woodhead, Obadiah 
Walker, and Thomas Radcliffe were restored. Of the 
ejected scholars none appear to have demanded again 
their former places, nor does there seem to have been 
any 4 casting out ' of those chosen in the interregnum 
4 as factious, and not fit to make collegiates.' Possibly 
some of the ejected scholars may in a period of twelve 
years have married, or have lost their taste for a 
collegiate life. In other Colleges but a small minority 
returned, for Wood calculates that the restored did not 
amount to a sixth part of the ejected. 


It is clear that throughout Oxford many of the 
Independent nominees to Fellowships and scholarships 
had for some time before the Restoration modified the 
tone of their Puritanism, and that, in externals at any 
rate, the fervour of their religious zeal was less promi- 
nent. Some of them were even looking forwards to a 
re-establishment of Church government based on the 
old model as a likely and not altogether undesirable 
event. Among those who had been appointed in 
University by the Visitors, none seem to have openly 
professed extreme fanatical opinions, or if held, such 
views were at the Restoration studiously concealed. In 
the College documents there is no evidence of anything 
but a hearty concurrence in the return to the old con- 
ditions of Oxford life. 

Fairer, who had been appointed Fellow in 1653, sub- 
sequently became Master, and others, such as Squire,* 
followed the current opinions of the times, and reaped 
their reward in holding ample preferments in a re- 
established Church. The Puritan idea was never in 
harmony with Oxford College life. Before the end of 
the Commonwealth a return to old customs seems to 
have come about in many Colleges, with the tacit 
approval of those who had been specially chosen to 
uphold a stricter regime. With the Restoration all 
the familiar items in the bursarial accounts, marking 
the old times of rejoicing in the College year, make 
their reappearance. ' Faggots for the 5th of November,' 
6 Greenery for Christmas,' charges pro festls on Trinity 
and St. Cuthberfs Bay, show plainly enough that a 
dismal piety was no longer in fashion. Richard Griffiths, 

* Rector of Rolleston, Derby ; Canon of Lichfield, 1675. 


Cromwell's own nominee, was Bursar in the year of the 
Restoration, and what his feelings may have been 
when he entered ' 8s. 3d. for a bone-fire at the King's 
Coronation ' we can only surmise. The performance of 
stage-plays in the Colleges for the entertainment of 
notable visitors, and especially about Christmas time, 
was now again revived. A casual note by Wood shows 
' Wit in a Constable, 1 by Glapthorne, to have been 
played in University on January 7, 1665, and ' The 
Wedding,' January 13, 1666 (Wood's Life and Times, 
O.H.S., ii. 2). 

The first serious business undertaken by the restored 
Master, Thomas Walker, was with regard to the adminis- 
tration of the Bennet benefaction. All the alterations 
made on the recommendation of the Parliamentarian 
Visitors, and in consequence of the suit of the next-of-kin, 
were now swept away by a decree of Chancellor Hyde, 
October 25, 1662, annulling the additional decree made 
in 1649, and confirming the settlement as ordained by 
Laud and approved by Lord Keeper Finch in 1640. 
The securing of this settlement, by which the old and 
new foundations were incorporated, was an absolute 
necessity for the prosperity of the College, still far too 
small and feeble in resources to maintain the dual 
financial control attempted in the Commonwealth 
period, which had resulted in endless confusion and 

Another difficulty which the Master had to face (one 
which in the case of his society was only too familiar) 
was the settlement of the College debts. Most of the 
Oxford Colleges found themselves in financial straits on 
the Restoration, but the slender income of University 


was, in addition to the ordinary difficulties of the time, 
overburdened by law charges consequent on the Bennet 
appeal and settlement, and the fruitless action against 
Foxcroft. A business-like investigation of the liabili- 
ties made by the Master in 1664 disclosed debts 
amounting to nearly ^400, made up chiefly of law 
charges, but also comprising 'certain old debts to 
brewers. 1 An old bond to the University for 50 is 
treated somewhat lightly in the list, a memorandum 
being attached ' that, in consideration it was a 
desperate debt, the University should in equity con- 
sider the College.' 

An adjustment of difficulties was made by borrowing 
among the Fellows and also outside the College. To 
secure a permanent settlement, a decree was obtained 
from the Vice-Chancellor ' that no new Fellows should 
be elected (not more than four Fellowships being vacant 
at the same time) until the debts were paid. 1 

More than mere relief from pressing liabilities was 
wanted. Great efforts were being made by the Master 
to complete the building of the new chapel, which 
was still only partially covered on his return. Though 
Thomas Walker must have lived to see this work 
nearly finished, he was not spared to witness the con- 
secration, which took place early in 1666. He died 
on December 5, 1665, and was buried in the north 
aisle adjoining the chancel in St. PeterVin-the-East. 
Despite his services and sufferings for the Royalist 
cause, Walker does not seem to have received Church 
preferment after the fashion of so many of his pre- 
decessors in aid of his slenderly-endowed headship, and 
was in consequence, if we may credit a matter-of-fact 


statement of Anthony Wood, obliged to take a second 
wife, ' whom he married for livelyhood only.' 

His successor, Richard Clayton, was more fortunate, 
being a Canon of Salisbury and the incumbent of 
various livings. In the election of the new Master the 
College appears to have again asserted the right to 
choose their head uninfluenced by external suggestion. 
Clayton was a Yorkshireman, and had been elected on 
the Percy foundation in 1629. He had acted as Bursar 
in the years from March, 1631, to 1634, and again in 
1636 and 1637, but had escaped the troubles of the Civil 
War by resigning his Fellowship in September, 1639. 
There is reason for believing that, had he wished it, 
Obadiah Walker might on this occasion have become 
Master, but for some unexplained cause he preferred to 
let the occasion pass. 

' Good for nothing but eating and drinking ' is the 
harsh, and perhaps hasty, judgment passed by Wood 
on the new Master. Whatever may have been his 
private character, the governance of the house during 
his term of office was distinguished by energy and 
independence. The effect of the Civil War had not 
been conducive to the maintenance of good order 
and discipline in the various Colleges. An energetic 
effort appears to have been made under Clayton to 
restore more decorous habits. To correct the lax 
fashion in which the statute as to taking Orders had 
come to be regarded, the Visitors decreed in January, 
1667, that Orders should be taken sine ter giver satione 
aut mora ' after the fourth year from inception "* in Arts. 
Ordinances were also passed by the Master and Fellows 
for the preservation of decency and order within the 


house. Among not a few other things that the students 
were ' to forbeare ' was the making of any noise or 
disturbance in the quadrangle, ' particularly the tolling 
of the bell,' except for meals and exercises, under a 
penalty of sixpence. New, and probably very necessary, 
regulations were made at the same time as to the 
cellar, into which ' none under the degree of Master or 
Gentleman Commoner were to be admitted, except 
when they entertain some of their friends out of the 

In the maintenance of discipline, servitors, com- 
moners, and gentlemen commoners were treated with 
widely varying degrees of severity. If a servitor 
'broke open a wood-house, or went upon the flats,' 
expulsion was the penalty, but a fine met the offence 
in the case of a commoner or tabler. Gentlemen 
commoners seem at this time to have been granted 
most of the privileges and advantages possessed by 
the Fellows themselves. Occasionally, however, even 
these favoured members were firmly but suavely dealt 
with. A letter from Obadiah Walker, acting as 
College tutor, to Lady Russell explaining the dis- 
missal of Mr. John Russell, gentleman commoner, shows 
that the process of 'sending down' was in the seven- 
teenth not unlike what it is in the twentieth century. 
He writes : 

'There was fear of other young gentlemen probably 
receiving great damage by Mr. Russell's conversation, so it 
was resolved to remove him in the fairest and least oppro- 
brious manner that could be ... therefore the Master 
sent for him at a meeting of the Society, and told him 

* Charlett papers, Ballard MS. 49, 24. 


with all gentleness what information he had lately re- 
ceived against him. . . . that it was not convenient he 
should live longer in the College.'* 

Excepting in the Commonwealth period, when the 
College was formally deprived of the power of election 
to its own Fellowships, at no time in its history were 
there so many attempts on the part of those in high 
places to influence Fellowship elections as during the 
first few years succeeding the Restoration. 

Both determination and diplomacy were needed in 
order to maintain a vestige of independence. The 
election of a Mr. Lawrence, a kinsman of the Bennet 
family, was successfully opposed as long as his candi- 
dature in 1665 was only pressed by Sir Harbottle 
Grimston, but when in the following year Lord Chan- 
cellor Clarendon insisted on his claim, the College was 
obliged to give way. Clarendon, as Chancellor of the 
University, secured his object by threatening in a letter 
to the College a visitation, when, he writes, ' any 
factious or obstinate persons will not be able to sup- 
port themselves. 1 1 

The same kind of resistance was shown in the case of 
John Savile, B.A. of the College, and a kinsman of 
Lord Halifax ; but a mandamus from the King in his 
favour, dated October 28, 1668, followed by a con- 
ciliatory letter from Halifax, who professes 'that he 
would be far from pursuing the Mandamus when he 
rests secure in their promise,' settled the matter. 
Warned, however, by experience, in the following year 
the College contrived to frustrate an attempt on the 

* Smith's Transcripts, x. 202. 

f C/. Clarendon's letter, dated July 5, 1666, in the muniment-room 


part of Lord Arlington to force on them the election 
of a Mr. Thompson. Timely information having been 
received, the election was hurried forward, and the 
indignant Thompson arrived a day too late, armed 
with his mandamus from the Crown.* The society 
attempted to appease the wrath of the Minister by 
deferential epistles, but spoke plainly enough as to 
the unsuitability of the candidate. t 

From 1670 to the end of Clayton's mastership the 
work of rebuilding was the main and absorbing interest 
in College life. It was with considerable difficulty that 
the necessary funds were raised to carry on the work 
piece by piece, but by great energy and untiring 
begging the result was achieved. 

We have seen how the intruding Commonwealth 
Fellows did not shirk the unpleasant task of pleading 
for contributions, and how manfully Master Thomas 
Walker carried on the work ; but by far the most 
skilful and prolific writer of begging letters was 
Obadiah Walker. This seems to have been well under- 
stood by all concerned, and correspondence which the 
Master might have been expected to have conducted 

* Smith's Transcripts, x. 227. 

f Clayton wrote to Williamson, Lord Arlington's secretary, 
October (9), 1669 : ' I have received a letter from Lord Arlington, 
which is so tender of the welfare of the University in general, and 
so sensible of the unsettled condition of this poor old College, that 
it is a great perplexity to us that we cannot at present comply with 
it. The election of Savile and Pindar took place on October 10, 
and the mandamus in favour of Thompson was dated October 1 1 . ' 
On October 14 the Master again wrote to Williamson regretting 
that the society could not comply with his lordship's desires, ' but 
the young man must thank himself for failing, as the Society can 
make appear' (S. P. Dom., 1669). 



appears to have fallen naturally under the direction of 
his indefatigable subordinate. 

In 1670 subscriptions were called for to complete the 
library. From 1670 to 1674 funds for the greater task 
of completing the quadrangle were solicited from all 
connected with the College in an elegant circular letter.* 
Thoroughly, indeed, must the canvass have been con- 
ducted, for contributions were received from such 
different personages as the late tonsor of the College 
(but now pincernd) and the Archbishop of Canterbury. 
Some gave graciously, others but moderately so. Among 
the former was the Bishop of Oxford, who ' presumed to 
send ' his \0 ' because a friend of yours and mine says 
you are pleased to take farthings. 1 Great formality 
was observed in the acknowledgment of various bene- 
factions, gilt-edged paper being specially purchased for 
the purpose ! 

The success which attended the endeavour to raise 
money outside the College was undoubtedly due mainly 
to the energy and influence of Obadiah Walker. For 
the first few years after the Restoration, up to the death 
of Thomas Walker, he had travelled and only been for 
short periods resident in the College, but after that 

* This letter concludes : ' But there still remains almost the 4 th 
side of the Quadrangle unfinished, for which the Master and Fellows 
are forced to apply themselves to all such noblemen and gentlemen 
as are sensible of the honour of learning in this nation ; intreating 
the aid of their Charity for the compleating of this, the MOTHER OF 
ALL COLLEGES, the nurse of so many men Reverend Bishops, 
Honorable Noblemen and other persons eminent both in Church 
and State : and is still ready to continue the same service and 
pay the same observance as she hath always hitherto done in 
advancing good literature, educating the children, etc.' (Ballard 
MSS. 49, 21). 


event, as tutor and Senior Fellow in residence, he took 
a most active part in the government of the house. 

On the death of Richard Clayton, which took place 
at Salisbury on June 10, 1676, there was no doubt 
as to his successor, and Walker was elected by the 
unanimous choice of the Fellows twelve days later. 

The new Master* was sixty- two years of age, and 
not in the best of health at the time of his election. 
Writing to his friend John Wolveridge, in November, 
1675, he describes his own situation : 

' Myself a great part of ye troublous times, and some 
years also since his Majesty's return, have been a stranger 
even in our own country : but being heaved out of my 
place, and wand'red a long time up and down, I am at last 
by the good providence of God set down just as I was. 
Old age, with its infirmities having already seized me, 
renders me incapable of any other than a reposed sedentary 
employment. Had not riding been so very troublesome 
to me I had visited your country/ 

Had he but known it, the unfortunate Obadiah was yet 
far from his haven, and destined in the many years still 
before him to encounter still more stormy passages in life. 

There is no absolute evidence that at this period the 
new Master was in secret a member of the Roman 
Catholic communion, or even that he was predisposed 
thereto. Of his conduct and place of residence when 
abroad we know but little. A letter from Abraham 
Woodhead to Dr. Sheldon proves that he was in Paris 
in 1658, and he is said to have been in Rome in 1662. 
The Register shows his almost continuous absence 

* O. Walker was the son of William Walker of Worsborodale, 
and was born at Darfield, near Barnsley, in 1616. 



between August, 1661, and January, 1665. We know 
that at Evelyn's recommendation he acted as tutor in 
1651, travelling with two sons of Mr. Hildyard of 
Horsley, and that subsequently these pupils became 
Roman Catholics.* It is also a matter of common 
knowledge that he was on terms of the closest intimacy 
with Abraham Woodhead,t his old tutor, who, it is 
almost certain, had accepted the Roman doctrines at or 
before the time when he was restored to his Fellowship.^ 
On the other hand, the fact that Walker received the 
Sacrament according to the Anglican forms at the 
hands of the Master of the College until he himself 
became Master, and continued to administer it to others 
after the accession of James II., proves that, at all 
events in outward profession, he continued up to that 
date a member of the English Church. 

Another Fellow besides Woodhead had, before the 
accession of Walker to the mastership, transferred his 
allegiance to the Church of Rome. Timothy Nourse 
(elected Fellow in 1658) wrote to Master Clayton in 
September, 1672, alluding to ' the many stories in the 
University concerning his changing religion, 1 yet not 
absolutely denying the fact, though leaving an implica- 
tion that the charge was false. After more corre- 

* Evelyn's Diary, ed. Bray, iii. 22. 

t Abraham Woodhead's conversion probably dated from about 
the time of his travelling abroad with pupils in 1643. Some time 
before this he felt ' inclinations towards the old Catholic religion, to 
which he was first moved by reading the Saints' Lives and then 
St. Augustine' (Letter from Woodbead to Dr. Wilby among the 
Woodhead MSS. in the possession of Sir Thomas Brooke, Bart., to 
which free access was kindly granted the author). 

} Smith's Annals, p. 257. 

Smith's Transcripts, x. 158. 


spondence the Master wrote advising him as a friend to 
come before the commencement of Michaelmas Term, 
1673, and take the Sacrament at St. Mary's. On 
Nourse refusing to do this, and further failing to appear 
in the College chapel when cited on January 3, 1674, 
his place was declared void two days later.* Woodhead, 
though by this time well known to be an admitted 
member of the Roman communion, seems to have 
escaped any similar censure, and to have remained in 
possession of his Fellowship to April 23, 1678, a few 
days before his death. f This exceptional treatment, 
which Wood regarded as due to the influence of Walker, 
was more probably owing to respect for Woodhead's 
great learning, and to the fact that he was living in 
absolute seclusion with a few select friends at Hoxton. 

As a controversial writer Woodhead has been termed 
4 the most ingenious and solid of the whole Roman 
party, 1 and he certainly was at this time the most 
learned exponent of its doctrine in England. To the 
influence of his character and writings I incline to 
attribute Walker's gradual change of religion. 

The energies of the new Master were at first directed 
to the completion of the College buildings ; but his 

* It must be noted that Obadiah Walker did not use any influence 
to save Nourse from expulsion. Timothy Nourse died July 21, 1699. 
Expulsion failed to alienate his affection for the College, for in his 
will we read : ' Item, the small remainder of my bookes I give to 
University College, of which I was an unworthy member. 1 

+ In November, 1675, Walker wrote to John Wolveridge : ' Mr. 
Woodhead is alive, but infirm and so enamoured of retirement that 
he corresponds not at all, or very little, with any of us. 1 O. Walker 
was left executor under A. Woodhead's will, by which property at 
Methley was left for the benefit of Methley Church, a proof of the 
testator's freedom from the usual bigotry of perverts. 


aspirations were by no means confined to a mere 
advancement of the material interests of the Society. 
To make good the grandiloquent phrases of the 
letter issued for the purpose of securing contributions, 
and * that the world should know that these bene- 
factions are not bestowed on mere drones ' (as Walker 
wrote to a friend in 1677),* the Society edited in that 
year a Latin translation of Sir John Spelman's Life of 
Alfred. This work was printed at the Theatre,")* and 
was an imposing volume in folio, adorned with prints 
of coins and of all the existing relics of the Saxon 
King. Numerous notes were added to Spel man's text 
by the editors, who doubtless regarded their labours 
as constituting a monument of seventeenth-century 
historical research. The nature of the notes in which 
their learning was paraded nearly got the authors into 
trouble. The year (1678) following the publication of 
the work was remarkable for the wild outburst of 
ultra-Protestant fanaticism occasioned by Titus Gates' 
discovery of the alleged Popish plot. At such a 
moment but slight evidence was needed whereon to base 
a charge of ' Papistry. 1 Some of the notes of the 
translated life contained such sympathetic reference to 
the Pope, to canonization, J and generally to Romish 
observances, that the watchful Archdeacon of Middlesex 
took upon him to give in 'several things against 
Obadiah,' and in the latter end of the month 'the 
Master was accused openly in the Parliament House for 

* Smith's MS. Transcripts, x. 192. 

f Walker had been chosen a Delegate of the Press in 1667. 

I Vita Alfredi, p. 171. 

Hist. MSS. Commission, 12 Rep., App. vii., 150. 


a Papist,'* and we are informed that ' had he not had a 
friend in the House who stood up for him, he would 
have had a messenger sent for him. 1 ! In the initial 
stages of discovery of the plot, our old acquaintance 
Ezreel Tonge was very forward in rendering assistance 
to Oates, and thereby for the moment gained no little 
credit and notoriety. Lapse of years had not lessened 
his ambition for the mastership, and if Wood may be 
trusted, 'he and Mr. Shippen now [in November and 
December, 1678] made friends in the Parliament House 
to have Mr. Walker turned out, because a Papist, that 
either of them might succeed. 1 ]: The intrigue, if it really 
existed, was not successful, and at the beginning of the 
next year Walker met the Vice-Chancellor's inquiry as 
to the ' names of any Popish recusants, or so reputed,' 
with a bold denial of the existence of any such in 
University College. 

Suspicions aroused ' in the Parliament House ' were 
not so easily allayed, and the question of the notes to 
the Life of Alfred again arose in April, 1679, when 
Sir Harbottle Grimston called attention to the printing 

* Wood's Life and Times, ii. 421. 
f Ibid. 

J Wood adds : ' Base ingratitude. False Tonge was his friend 
and formerly his servitor." Tonge was certainly writing to Walker 
in friendly terms, July 27, 1670, begging for his assistance ' in 
providing a competency for him nearer to Oxford/ for ' I esteem 
the distance from yourself and the University a kind of banishment 
(Smith's Transcripts, x. 143). 
Certificate given by Walker : 

' Feby. 17, 1678/9. 

4 These are to certify that I know not of any one in University 
College in Oxon. to be either Papists or Popishly inclined. 

' Witness my hand OBAD. WALKER, M r ." 

(Wood's Life and Times, ii. 440.) 


of Popish books in Oxford.* Nothing seems to have 
happened on this occasion, but it is clear that the 
Master's disclaimers were not regarded with much 
confidence, and there appears now to have been good 
reason for distrusting him. It was well known that he 
had been left an executor and trustee by Abraham 
Woodhead, on his death in 1678, and that the house at 
Hoxton where Woodhead had lived, and which was 
popularly (though in error) supposed to be a seminary 
for the education of young Catholics, was now in his 

On June 20, 1679, Francis Nicholson, M.A.t of 
University College, preached at St. Mary's on behalf of 
the Master, and used his text, ' Surely there is a reward 
for the righteous, 1 in such fashion as to call for the 
interference of the Vice-Chancellor. The main passages 
attracting criticism seem openly to have upheld the 
Roman doctrines of purgatory and penance. Later in 
July the preacher was compelled to acknowledge his 
unfeigned grief for the same, and to crave pardon for 
this great indiscretion.':): 

This same year Walker published his book The 
Benefits of our Saviour Jesus Christ to Mankind.^ This 
little work appears at first to have escaped public 

* Wood's Life, ii. 498. 

t Francis Nicholson, a servitor of the College in 1666, was an 
avowed Catholic in 1685, and ultimately joined the Carthusians. 

J Wood's Life, ii. 491. 

The copy of The Benefits of our Saviour Jesus Christ to Mankind, 
1680, in the British Museum (press-mark 4226 e), belonged to Jo 
Seyhard, of University College, 1683, who made a note therein : 
' This book was reputed to be written by Mr. Obadiah Walker, 
who was Master of Univ. Coll. in my time, I being a commoner. 
He was reputed a great scholar, orator,' etc. 


attention, but in 1685, on certain alterations suggested 
in the text by the Regius Professor of Divinity not 
being carried out by the author, the Vice-Chancellor 
' proclaimed ' the book, and the bedels forbade its sale 
in Oxford.* 

When in 1681 the Protestant agitation had become 
less violent, and its promoters began to be discredited, 
for a time public attention ceased to be attracted to 
the College, and the Master was left to his devices 
in peace. Whatever his inmost sympathies at this 
time may have been, and it is impossible to doubt what 
they really were, he still remained in outward com- 
munion with the Church of England, and administered 
and received the Sacrament according to the Anglican 
rite in the College chapel. 

His influence in the College was as yet insufficient to 
secure the election of his nominees to Fellowships or 
scholarships. In October, 1678, he had attempted to 
secure the election of William Johnson, B.A., but after 
a somewhat exciting struggle and several prorogations 
of the election, the Fellows rejected the candidate on 
account of his 'mores parum laudabiles,' and chose 
Hugh Todd,t a staunch Churchman, in his place. Not 
until another five years had passed did the Master again 
try his strength with the Fellows. In January, 1684, 
he attempted to secure the election of Thomas Deane, 
instead of Thomas Bennet, but again failed his action 
being just frustrated by a single vote by the un- 

* Wood's Life and Times, iii. 164. 

f Hugh Todd afterwards became Rector of Penrith and Pre- 
bendary of Carlisle, and was notable for his protracted litigation 
with Nicolson, Bishop of Carlisle, as to the extent of episcopal 


expected return of John Nailor, 'fere fortuito ad 
mediam noctem ante diem electionis.'* 

As the accession of the Duke of York to the throne 
in the early future became more certain, the Master's 
personal influence seems to have waxed stronger, and he 
secured the election of Deane in December, 1684, in 
place of Michael Bingley, who, according to William 
Smith, was ' circumvented into resignation. 1 In Deane, 
who entered the College as a servitor in 1669, and who 
had for some time acted as tutor, Walker secured ' a 
creature and convert,'! and one who proved a useful 
assistant as a controversial writer. His other principal 
supporter among the Fellows was Nathaniel Boyse, 
who was appointed Bursar in 1685. At this time 
Boyse ' was suspected of being a Roman Catholic,' and 
later in the year was compelled to recant before the 
Vice-Chancellor ' several passages savouring of Popery,' 
in a sermon preached by him at St. Mary's on July 26. 1 

On February 11, 1685, proclamation of King James's 
accession was made in Oxford with all due solemnities. 
As might be expected, University distinguished itself 
in the general rejoicing. 'Beare' on such occasions 
flowed freely, a barrel ' being set without the gate 
for any to drink,' and another within the gate in 
the Gate House, and, says Wood, speaking of his 
own College, ' the gravest and greatest seniors of the 
house were mellow that night as at other Colleges.' 

* See note in the register by William Smith. 

f Wood's Athena, iv. 450. 

J On October 12 Boyse was received by the new King, who told 
him he had seen and read his sermon, and thought it was ' an 
ingenious discourse and well-framed ' (Wood's Life and Times 
vol. iii., p. 156). Wood's Life and Times, iii. 131. 


After the country's acceptance of a Sovereign attached 
to the Roman Church, there does not seem to have 
been much further concealment of the Masters religious 
opinions. His refusal in this year to accept the 
corrections to his book proposed by the Regius Professor 
of Divinity, and approved by the Bishop of Oxford, 
displayed a growth of independence ; but his general 
behaviour was still guided by great caution, and it 
was not until after he had been summoned to attend 
the King in January, 1686, that on his return he 
altogether ceased to attend prayers in the College 

It was generally reported that he was sent for to be 
consulted as to intended changes in the University, and 
Massey's* subsequent appointment as Dean of Christ 
Church was probably due to his advice. 

The first public announcement of Walker's con- 
version, ' which made a great noise throughout the 
nation ' (Wood, iii. 182), was contained in the French 
Gazette of March 8, where it was also said that ' he was 
about to build a Chapel in which to sing mass.'' An 
attempt was made to free the new converts from their 
disabilities under the law by means of a royal dispensa- 
tion, dated May 3, 1686, which permitted Obadiah 
Walker, Nathaniel Boyse, Thomas Deane, and John 
Bernard, of Brasenose College, to absent themselves 
'from Church, Chapel, and in all places of Common 
Prayer as the same is now used in the Church of 
England, 1 and relieved them from taking the oaths of 
allegiance and supremacy. Under the same dispensa- 

* Massey is said by Wood to have been O. Walker's servitor 
(Life and Times, iii. 176). 


tion all courts of judges, as well ecclesiastical as civil, 
were to ' supersede and forbear at all time hereafter, all 
prosecutions and proceedings against the said parties. 1 * 
Thus protected, Walker set to work to forward the 
Roman Catholic cause in Oxford with all the energy 
and enthusiasm of a pervert. Mass was now openly 
said in the Master's Lodging, but at first the general 
inclination was to ridicule and make light of him and 
his congregation. The Bishop of Carlisle, writing on 
June 3, 1686, quotes a letter from Oxford, describing, 
about a month before, the congregation in the lodging 
as consisting of 

' no less than four, he [Walker] himself making one of the 
number, two poor sorry Fellows of his own College and a 
shatterheaded Fellow of B.N.C., one Bernard . . . they 
are become extremely despicable and ridiculous to that 
degree that some young wags of Ch. Ch. the other day 
sent old Job, a poor natural who looks after their College 
dishes and trenchers, with this catch, that he sung at 
Walker's door : 

' Oh, old Obadiah, 
Sing Ave Maria ; 
But so will not I a. 

For why a ? 
I had rather be a fool than a knave a.'f 

Popular feeling was shown during the Play in Act 
term by the King's players, when the interpolation of 

* A copy of this so-called ' docket ' for Obadiah Walker and 
others is contained in the Tanner MSS. (cccclx., p. 54; Gutch 
Collection, vol. i., p. 287). It was entered in the College Register, 
pp. in, 112. 

t 12 Rep. Hist. MSS. Com., pp. 17, 150. 


the dictum ' He that changes his religion ought to be 
hanged '* delighted the audience. 

But when the perfect seriousness of his purpose was 
more fully comprehended, angry resentment, both in 
town and country, took the place of ridicule. He 
appears to have imitated the King in the art of 
* closetting ' persons of importance with whom he came 
in contact. Dr. Clarke, member for the University, 
after leaving London to avoid the King, was in turn 
obliged to go to Peterborough ' that he might be 
out of O. Walker's way.'t 

In the College itself, however, there seems to have 
been no spirit of resistance remaining. Neither the 
taking College rooms for a Chapel under Roman ritual, 
nor the subsequent appropriation of the stipend of a 
Fellowship to provide for its ministrations, appear to 
have excited opposition.]: Probably the alarmed 
Fellows were only too thankful that their own chapel 
should escape. The Master read to the society a letter 
from Lord Sunderland, stating that it was the King's 
desire that rooms should be set apart for the service 
of God, and followed the reading by remarking : 

* Anthony Ley, the author of this, lost his place a few weeks 
after in consequence. 

f Hist. MSS. Com., MS. of F. Leyburne Popham, 264. 

} On January 8, 1686-87, the King addressed a letter to the College 
with respect to the Fellowship vacant by the death of Edward 
Hinchliffe : ' We have thought fit hereby to signify our will and 
pleasure to you that you forbear to elect any person into his place 
till further order from us, and that in the meantime the revenue of 
the said vacant Fellowship, viz., the Chamber diett and salary, be 
sequestered into the hands of the Master of our said College to 
be applied to such uses as we shall appoint ' (copied in College 
Register, p. no). 


' Gentlemen, you perceive I may take any room : your 
common-room is the largest, but, out of respect to 
the Society, I will take only that which is in the side 
of the College next to my lodging ' (Ballard MSS. 70, 
p. 72). 

The new chapel, ' made by removal of the partitions 
from two low rooms, their studies and bedchambers '* 
(Smith's Annals, p. 286), was opened for the public 
celebration of Mass on August 15, 1686. This brought 
the rabble together opposite the College gate at service- 
time, and on September 12 the soldiers attending the 
Mass were forced to come out and quiet them. To all 
the Master had now become a byword, ' Obadiah 
Avemaria. 1 At the beginning of the next year the 
traders threatened him, ' complaining because of the 
scarceness of scholars, frighted away for fear of popery, 1 
and on his head fell the ' curses of all, both great and 
small ' (A. Wood's Life and Times, iii. 209). Members, 
however, of Catholic families, who before had been 
debarred the University, began to enter, and in some 
small degree took the place of those thus ' frighted " 
away, t 

Backed by the sovereign power, the Master seems to 
have cared but little for hostile demonstrations. In May, 
1686, he had obtained a license^ from the King to 

* The rooms actually taken and made use of were the ground-floor 
rooms on the east side of the large quadrangle, extending from the 
chapel wall to the entry connecting the large with the Radcliffe 

t In 1687 a Dormer of Peterley, a Scarisbrick of Scarisbrick, 
and a Cuffield of Cuffield, were entered as gentlemen commoners. 

| The license is granted to O. Walker and his assignees, May, 
1686. The sanguine state of mind of the King at this time is shown 


print and sell for twenty-one years a list of thirty-six 
works, mostly of a controversial nature, maintaining 
Romish doctrines. In October he returned from 
London, ' a great deal of paper with him ' prepared 
and determined to make full use of the new power 
with which he was intrusted. From this time forward 
his action became distinctly and openly aggressive. 
As Woodhead's executor he was in possession of 
all his works, published and unpublished, and he now 
proceeded to republish the Two Discourses concern- 
ing the Adoration of our blessed Saviour in the 
Holy Eucharist. This appeared in January, 1687, 
the work being executed for Walker by the printer 
Lichfield. In consequence, however, according to 
Wood, of the sheets having been improperly supplied 
to those intending to answer the work, the Master 
determined to erect a press under his own eye in the 
stabling at the back of the College. The work turned 
out from this short-lived press was well executed, 
in a clear type and on a good paper.* In 1688 the 
title-pages came to be distinguished by a vignette 
woodcut of Kino* Alfred in crown and ermine collar. 


The University, though unable to prevent the publica- 
tion, afforded the champions of the National Church 
all facilities for answering the intruders. It was seen 
with alarm, increased by the sense of helplessness to 
arrest the mischief, that in their midst, from within 
the very walls of their oldest foundation, a stream of 

by a condition that the number of any one of the said books printed 
in any one year exceed not 20,000. The list is given in Gutch Coll. 
Curiosa, vol. i., p. 289 (taken from Tanner MS. cccclx.). 

* The most important work produced was A Compendious Discourse 
on the Eucharist, with two appendices, 217 pp., 4to. 


controversial writings was being poured forth with the 
deliberate intention of sapping the foundations of the 
National Church. 

A pamphlet war ensued, and when the King, during 
his visit to Oxford in September, 1687, complained to 
the Vice- Chancellor of the tone of the controversial 
works then being printed, the latter replied that he 
thought the best way to remedy the existing state of 
things was to suppress Walker's press, for the Univer- 
sity ' did not begin, and would be quiet if not provoked. 1 
To this the King is said to have expressed assent, but 
his acceptance the same afternoon of two or three 
copies of works from the intruding press showed no 
inclination to censure. 

On the occasion of the royal visit it is natural to 
expect to find the College receiving special favour, as 
the pioneer in the way which the King desired the 
University to follow. 

Earlier in the year the King's statue* had been set 
up with great ceremony over the gate within the 
(present larger) quadrangle, and doubtless it was hoped 
that benefit might accrue to all concerned when the 

* The setting up of the statue took place on Monday, February 7, 
1687 (the anniversary of the King's accession falling on a Sunday). 
The ceremony took place between ten and eleven in the morn- 
ing. ' A partie of horse standing in the Street opposite to the 
Common Gate did, upon notice given that it was up, discharge each 
his Pistoll, which being done the spectators in the quadrangle and 
those in the street gave a great shout." This was followed by an 
eloquent English speech, delivered by Edward Hales, in the hall. 
Afterward was a ' most noble feast, all sorts of wine Sack, Claret, 
Smyrna, and in the evening the College was illuminated by candles 
being set up in the windows, three in every light, that is, 6 candles 
in every window, which continued burning till 9 at night ' (Creech 
to Charlett, Letters oj Eminent Persons, p. 46). 


attention of the Sovereign was drawn to this work of 
flattery. The King visited the College in the afternoon 
of Sunday, September 4, 1687, and was received by the 
Master and Fellows at the gateway. He afterwards 
attended vespers in. the new chapel with many of his 
guard. Edward Hales, gentleman commoner, a recent 
convert, and son of Sir Edward Hales, made a speech 
{ thanking His Majesty for the toleration they enjoyed, 
and that the Reformation of heresy had first begun in 
that house, 1 and declaring that ' though the winds and 
waves beat, yet their Church was secure, being built 
upon a double rock infallibility and the King.' 

The King's favour on this occasion seems, however, to 
have been confined to his visit, and William Smith, in 
spite of his strong anti-Romanist sentiment, is disposed 
to blame the Master for losing his opportunity he 
'that had the King's ear, for never having had the 
prudence nor kindness to the College as to request 
the least favour to the Society from him ' (Annals, 

The King, no doubt, before his visit to Oxford had 
consulted Walker as to the condition of Magdalen 
College, and Anthony Farmer, the ill-chosen royal 
nominee for the presidentship, appears to have made 
the Master's acquaintance in order to win his interest.* 
After his unsuccessful personal attempt to coerce the 
Fellows of Magdalen, James committed the considera- 
tion of their case to the Bishop of Oxford, the Dean of 
Christ Church, and Obadiah Walker. The views of the 
latter as to the King's claim of powers of dispensation 
accorded well with the royal pretension, for in February, 

* Bloxam, Magdalen College and James, ii., p. 71. 



1 688, he wrote : { Methinks nothing can be more plain 
than that he who makes us Corporations hath power 
also to unmake us if we deserve it, as certainly the 
Magdalen men have done. 1 His opinions and advice 
with regard to the affairs of Magdalen exhibited none 
of the caution and tact that he displayed in the case of 
his own College. Subsequent events showed that his 
estimate of the force of public opinion was completely 
inaccurate. Blinded with bigotry, the King was unable 
to discern the invincible nature of the nation's feeling, 
and it was not till the rejoicings of the country at his 
humiliation in the acquittal of the seven Bishops were 
so loud as to be unmistakable that he began to waver 
in his obstinate course. Still, force was needed before 
the Sovereign could be made to comprehend his folly in 
alienating the tried loyalty of the University of Oxford, 
his most steadfast adherent. It was only the threatened 
invasion that caused the King to attempt too late to 
conciliate the outraged University by a hurried resto- 
ration of the Magdalen Fellows, who had then been 
ejected for twelve months. 

On November 1 rumours were current that Walker 
was ' going to resigne up his Headship.' The attempt 
to Romanize the University had failed, and the main 
instrument in the endeavour, perceiving that the cause 
was lost, made hasty preparations for departure. 
On November 9 the Master went to London after 
' barring his door next to the street,' and arranging 
that part of his books should be conveyed to the 
College library and another part to the Public library 
' should the rebels come to Oxford in his absence.' Not 
quite three weeks later ' the printers made all cleare in 


his printing house and quitted, 1 * and at the same time 
Thomas Deane and Wakeman,t all hope for them now 
being at an end, ' did take away all from their Chapel 
" and locked up Mr. Walker's lodging. 1 So rapidly came 
to an end, after the landing of the Prince of Orange, 
the most hopeful of the various attempts to secure a 
College in the Universities in the interests of the 
Roman Church. 

One of the most remarkable features of this peculiar 
chapter of the College history had been the absence of 
all violence or bitterness between the parties within the 
College itself. Outside, the Master and his following 
were exposed to savage enough criticism, but within 
the walls of his own society Romanists and Anglicans 
seem to have lived in fair comfort together. Services 
in the ' New Masshouse ' and in the College chapel 
appear to have been carried on simultaneously, and such 
disturbances as took place in the conduct of the former 
seem always to have been due to outside instigation. J 

Amicable existence under such difficult circumstances 
was probably due in great measure to Wai ker n s personal 
character, and to the fact that he had been long a 
member of the Society and understood well its institu- 
tions and traditions. William Smith admits that he 
has ' many good things to say of him ; as that he was 
neither proud nor covetous. 1 His academic character 
and literary gifts were in harmony with his office. The 

* Wood's Life and Times, iii. 282. 

f Wakeman was a Jesuit who had acted as chaplain in the 
College (Wood, p. 285). 

J It is noted that on August 4, 1688, a great disturbance was 
made by a boy from the town bringing in a cat under his coat into 
the new Masshouse. 



bent of inquiring minds in the Society at this time 
inclined towards antiquarianism and in this study 
' four members* of the College attained to some degree 
of celebrity. The Master and his Fellows were here on 
ground of common interest, and this, combined with 
mutual respect and a scholarlike distaste for extreme 
courses, prevented Walker's religious zeal from inter- 
fering with his personal friendships. Beyond this there 
must have been something peculiarly attractive and 
lovable in the man who won the complete confidence 
and friendship of so retiring and learned a student as 
Abraham Woodhead, and who retained till death, alike 
during good and evil fortune, the sturdy attachment of 
his old pupil John Radcliffe. 

In consequence of this sympathy existing between 
Master and Fellows, the College probably did not 
suffer during the period of Romanist control to the 
same extent as Magdalen and Christ Church. The 
number of entries fell, from an annual average of 
eleven or twelve, to five in 1687 and four in 1688, 

* Hugh Todd, elected Fellow of University from Queen's, 1678; 
M.A. July, 1679; D.D. December, 1692; author of various anti- 
quarian works. 

Robert Plot, migrated to University College from Magdalen 
Hall, 1676. He was at the expense of placing the statue of King 
Alfred (the remains of which now stand in the Master's garden) 
over the portal in High Street. Secretary to Royal Society, 1682; 
first Keeper of Ashmole's Museum, May, 1683 ; Professor of 
Chemistry, 1683 ; Mowbray Herald, 1695 ; author of History oj 
Staffordshire, 1686; died April 30, 1696. 

Richard Richardson, matriculated at University College June 20, 
1681 ; botanist ; correspondent of Sloane, Dillenius, Gronovius, 
Sherard, etc. ; F.R.S. 1712; died April 21, 1741. 

John Hudson, elected Fellow of University from Queen's, 1686 ; 
afterwards Bodley Librarian. 


but speedily recovered to more than the average 
in 1689. 

Any full account of the subsequent fortunes of the 
unhappy Master does not lie within the scope of the 
present work. He left London probably on the same 
day as the King, in the company of John Massey, 
Dean of Christ Church, Pullen, a Jesuit Master of 
the Savoy, and Dr. Leyburne. Finding ' the rabble 
up ' at Faversham, they attempted to return to town, 
but were captured by the mob somewhere near 
Sittingbourne, and committed to the gaol at Faver- 
sham, from whence Walker was transmitted to 
London,* and confined in the Tower, charged with 
high treason. To him thus situate the Register 
records that one of the Fellows, Bateman, was sent 
on January 7, 1689, to ask whether he would resign 
the mastership ; after a day's deliberation ' responsum 
dedit se nolle resignare. 1 This reply being conveyed 
to the Vice-Chancellor, the Fellows were summoned 
to appear before the Visitors in the Apodyterium 
of the House of Convocation on January 26. There 
the hearing of the complaint of the Fellows against 
the Master (which they were making by the advice 
of the Vice-Chan cell or) was deferred to February 4. 
On this day the Visitors and Fellows solemnly met in 
the chapel between the hours of 8 and 9 a.m., and after 
the hearing of the Litany adjourned to the common- 
room. Here the Fellows formally moved a complaint 

* A sheet was at this time circulated in Oxford, entitled A 
Dialogue between Father Gifford, the late Popish President of Maudlin, 
and Obadiah Walker, Master of University, upon their new College Prefer- 
ment in Newgate. 


against the Master, in that he had violated the statutes 
of the College 

1. By his defection from the Church of England, ' ad 
Romanam sive Papisticam religionem. 1 

2. By holding, cherishing, and frequenting unlawful 
conventicles within the College. 

3. By procuring the sequestration of the revenue and 
emoluments of a Fellowship to sinister uses. 

4. By causing to be printed and published books 
against the Reformed religion, to the grave scandal of 
the University as well as of the College. 

On these charges being proved ' on good testimony, 1 
the Master's office was declared vacant by the Visitors 
and his name struck off' the Buttery Book by the 

Edward Farrer, who had been elected Fellow more 
than thirty years before, was chosen in his place. 

It is useless to speculate on the possibility of success 
of the schemes for the conversion of the University, had 
more time been given to pave the way, had more fitting 
instruments been employed, or had the King's temper 
inclined to politic and conciliatory courses. In the 
event, all the schemes and hopes, all the plottings and 
intrigues, of four years proved merely a waste of labour 
as soon as a rallying-point was found and the news 
reached Oxford of the landing at Torbay. 

Among the members of the Society of Jesus the 
University of Oxford had been regarded as the very 
citadel of heresy. 'Oxford being the fountain head 
whence flowed the poisonous streams of heretical 
doctrine, and where the Anglican divines and polemics 
were usually trained, if only this stronghold of heresy 


could be occupied it would open an easy way to all the 
rest/* Three important points of vantage in this 
University! had for a time been carried, but on their 
forced abandonment, within a few weeks not a trace 
remained of the occupation. 

Sadly writes Father Henry Pel ham, one of the priests 
resident in Oxford, to his Superior : 

' I can only say that in the general decline of trade (i.e., 
religion) we have had our share. For before this turn we 
were in a very hopeful way, for we had three public shops 
(Chapels) open in Oxford. One did wholly belong to us, 
and good custom we had, viz., the University (Univ. Coll. 
Chapel), but now it is shut up. The Master was taken, 
and has been ever since in prison, and the rest forced to 
abscond . . . but now all is blown over.'J 

As in other Colleges, the Roman Catholic society in 
University College vanished out of Oxford history. 
The gentlemen commoners of Catholic birth withdrew 
to their own homes or abroad. Edward Hales the 
younger held to his new religion, and died for his King 
at the Battle of the Boyne ; Robert Whyte met his 
death in the same cause before the walls of London- 
derry. Nicholson became a Carthusian, and was living 
in Lisbon in 1725, still treasuring the literary remains 
of his old tutor, Abraham Woodhead. Nathaniel 
Boyse at first went abroad, but was resident in London 

* See Foley, Records of the English Province S.J., vol. v., p. 955. 

f University, Christ Church, and Magdalen. 

J Foley 's Records, vol. v. f 956. 

Hales and Whyte were almost exact contemporaries, the one 
being admitted June 24, 1684, the other August 26, 1684. Hales 
was the eldest son of Sir Edward Hales. 


in the house of Sir John Hales in 1707.* Thomas 
Deane, the least worthy of the band, is to be met with 
standing in the pillory at Charing Cross, is heard of as 
abusing the confidence placed in him as a trustee, and 
eventually is found a miserable denizen of the Fleet, t 

As for the Master, his fate was again ' to wander a long 
time up and down,' to strive to maintain himself by his 
pen, and at last to find in old age and poverty a haven of 
rest under the hospitable roof and loving care of the 
pupil whom he had tried in vain to convert,! his loyal 
friend in all vicissitudes of fortune, who provided for 
his burial in St. Pancras Churchyard, and placed over 
his remains the simple and pathetic epitaph 


' Per bonam famarn et infamiam.' 

(which his co-religionists have forgotten to restore). 

In addition to the names mentioned in the text in 
Chapters VI. and VII., the following should be remem- 

* Hearne, Collections, ii. 76, note. 

f Woodhead MS. in possession of Sir Thomas Brooke. 

J Two letters from the correspondence between O. Walker and 
Dr. Radcliffe are preserved by Pittis in his Life of Raddiffe, pp. 15, 16, 
and show that very little progress was made towards conversion. 
Radcliffe at first seems to have tried to check the correspondence, 
but, failing, writes bluntly enough on May 25, 1688: 'Fathers, 
Councils, and antique authorities may have their influence in their 
proper places ; but should any of them, although covered with dust 
1,400 years old, tell me that the bottle I am now drinking with some 
of your acquaintances is a wheelbarrow, and the glass in my hand a 
salamander, I should ask leave to dissent from them. . . . You 
may be given to understand from hence that, having been bred up 
a Protestant at Wakefield, and sent from thence in that persuasion 
to Oxford, where during my continuance I had no relish for 
absurdities, I intend not to change principles and turn papist in 


bered as among the viri clariores of the seventeenth 
century : 

LEONARD DIGGES : Younger brother of Dudley Digges ; 
matriculated 1603 ; spent many years in foreign Univer- 
sities ; a translator of Spanish literature ; his lines to the 
memory of Shakespere prefixed to the first edition of the 
collected plays. 

Sir GEORGE RADCLIFFE : Born at Overthorpe, Thornhill, 
Yorks, April 21, 1593 ; matriculated 1609; a Bencher of 
Gray's Inn in 1632 ; was a member of the Council in 
Ireland under Wentworth in 1633 ; acted as Treasurer in 
1634; was impeached with Wentworth in 1640; D.C.L., 
Oxford, 1643; died in exile at Flushing, after suffering 
great hardships, December 11, 1657. 

HUMPHREY CHAMBERS : Matriculated 1674 ; Rector of 
Claverton, Somersetshire, and of Pewsey ; became a 
Presbyterian, and was made assistant to the Commissioners 
appointed by Oliver Cromwell for the ejection of scan- 
dalous ministers, and wrote a defence of their proceedings ; 
died September 8, 1662. 

JOHN TWYSDEN, M.D. : Matriculated 1623 ; writer on 
medicine and mathematics ; died September 13, 1688. 

THOMAS HENSHAW : Matriculated 1634; travelled, and 
after Restoration became Under-Secretary of the French 
Tongue to Charles II., James II., and William III. ; 
Diplomatist-Envoy to Denmark in 1672 ; died January 2, 

THOMAS RADCLIFFE : Son of Sir George ; entered as 
gentleman commoner ; became Privy Councillor in Ireland 
after the Restoration; buried at Thornhill, December 11, 

DUDLEY LOFTUS : M.A. from University, 1640 ; a grand- 
son of Adam Loftus, Archbishop of Dublin ; became 


Vicar-General to Ussher, Archbishop of Armagh ; Loftus 
was fortunate in holding lucrative offices in Ireland, both 
under the Parliamentarian rule and after the Restoration. 
His main distinction was as an Orientalist, and he was the 
author of numerous translations ; he died in June, 1695. 

Sir THOMAS CULPEPPER : Matriculated 1640 ; B.A. 164-3 ; 
afterward Fellow of All Souls ; writer on usury. 

THOMAS STRODE : Matriculated 1642 ; a pupil of Abraham 
Woodhead ; became eminent as a mathematician ; pub- 
lished a treatise on Permutations in 1678. He died 
February 4, 1699- 

THOMAS JONES : Appointed Fellow in 1646 by the Com- 
missioners ; involved in a controversy with Morley, Bishop 
of Winchester ; died October, 1682. 

JOHN FLAVEL : Entered the College, 1646; Puritan 
divine ; author of many theological works ; was a famous 
preacher, and, according to Wood, 'an impudent plagiary, 
and one who became rich by marrying wives'; died 
June 26, 1691. 

ROWLAND STEDMAN : Scholar 1649 ; Nonconformist di- 
vine ; ejected from Wokingham 1662 ; Chaplain to Philip, 
Lord Wharton ; author of theological works ; died Sep- 
tember 14, 1673. 

WILLIAM ANNAND : Matriculated 1652 ; Vicar of Leighton 
Buzzard 1662 ; Chaplain to Lord Middleton when High 
Commissioner of Scotland ; Bishop of Dunblane. 

WILLIAM SQUIRE: Fellow 1655 ; Rector of Rolleston, 
Derbyshire ; polemical theologian and author of anti- 
Romanist works; died September, 1677. 

ROBERT PARSONS : Matriculated in December, 1663 ; 
Rector of Waddesdon, Bucks, and Oddington, Gloucester- 
shire ; Archdeacon of Gloucester ; credited with having 
brought about John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester's, repent- 
ance. Parsons was in constant attendance on the Earl for 


the three months before his death, and preached his 
funeral sermon ; died 1714. 

JOHN INETT: Matriculated 1663; Church historian and 
author of Origines Anglicance, published 1710. Inett was 
appointed Chaplain-in-Ordinary to William III. in 1700. 

ROBERT MORISON : Incorporated Doctor of Medicine 
from University College after his election as the first 
Professor of Botany in Oxford, appointed December 16, 
1669. 'In September, 1670, he translated himself to the 
Physic Garden, and there read in the middle of it (with a 
table before him) on herbs and plants 3 days a week for 
5 weeks ' (Wood, Annals, iii. 898). He was also physician 
to Charles II. ; died 1683. 

HUGH TODD: Fellow 1677 ; Rector of Penrith and 
Prebend of Carlisle ; notable for his long litigation with 
W. Nicolson, Bishop of Carlisle, as to the extent of 
episcopal authority. 

WILLIAM READING: Matriculated 1693; classical scholar 
and editor of Eusebius ; Librarian of Sion College ; died 
December 10, 1744. 

WILLIAM ELSTOB : Fellow 1697 ; Anglo Saxon scholar; 
died March 3, 1715. 

THOMAS CARTE: Matriculated July 8, 1698; B.A. 1702, 
afterwards incorporated at Cambridge ; Historian; published 
his Life of James, Duke of Ormonde, in 1736; died April 2, 

JOHN THORPE: Matriculated 1698 ; antiquary; F.R.S. 
1705; he collected material for a history of Kent, which 
was published by his son in 1769, under the title Registnun 



Masters : Edward Farrer, Thomas Benet, Arthur Charlett, 
and Thomas Cockman. 

EDWARD FARRER* had been elected Fellow, on the death 
of Richard Washington, under the Parliamentary Visitors 
in 1651. His experience of Universities was considerable. 
Originally of St. Andrews, he migrated to Trinity College, 
Cambridge, in December, 1647, but took his B.A. degree 
from Magdalen Hall in January, 1651. Time and twenty- 
five years of clerical duty as curate of Flamstead had 
somewhat moderated his Puritan fervour ; but the 
election of a Master of still such undoubted Pro- 
testantism probably arose from a desire of the Fellows 
to clear the College from all suspicion of a lurking 
sympathy with the Church of Rome. 

The new Master held office for only two years, dying 
on February 18, 1691, ' vir humanissimus et desidera- 
tissimus.' Though for some years in ill-health, his death 
was sudden : ' hora decima matutina apoplexia inopinate 

* See College Register. Edward Farrer was second son of John 
Farrer, of Ewood, in the parish of Halifax, by his second wife, 
Susan, daughter of Anthony Waterhouse (Watson's Halifax, 
pp. 144, 145). 


percussus."* His experience as Bursar in 1653 probably 
led him to make the kindly bequest of 50* (' ex facul- 
tatibus valde modicis' Coll. Reg.), to be handed by 
each Bursar to his successor to enable them to balance 
their annual account. 

Into Farcer's place the Society elected on March 3, 
1691, Thomas Benet, a kinsman of the College bene- 
factor, Simon Bennet, and a Fellow on the new founda- 
tion. To meet the doubt as to whether the Master 
must needs be a Fellow on the old foundation, a dis- 
pensation was granted by the Vice-Chancel lor, Doctors, 
and Proctors to the aspirant to office a few days before 
his election. Benet was Rector of Winwick in Lanca- 
shire, and, from a letter written by him immediately 
on the death of Farrer, appears to have been an eager 
applicant for the vacancy. His tenure, too, of office 
was brief, lasting only fourteen months, when, says the 
Register, 'Tussi vehemente familiari sibi et inveterato 
morbo correptus est.' 

Considerable debate followed as to a fitting successor 
in the headship. William Smith, who will be spoken 
of at greater length hereafter, could without doubt have 
now secured the post had he so desired. The expenses 
attaching to the office and the smallness of the stipend 
deterred the Fellows from undertaking it, and led them 
to look outside their own number for a Head.f Their 

* This idea of affording some support and assistance in balancing 
his account to the Bursar was not wholly Farrer's, for in 1680 
William Hopkins, ' Seneschallus sive Attornatus hujus Collegii,' 
had done the same thing, leaving 50 to the College for a stock for 
the Bursar, to be called ' Steward Hopkins his stock.' 

t The whole income of the Master was in 1699, 110 IOS - 4^-, not 
reckoning his lodging, a load of hay, and some other perquisites 
(Hearne, Collections, O.H.S., i. 300). 


hope was to find a man likely from his private fortune 
and position to maintain the dignity of the office and 
ultimately perhaps to enlarge the revenue of the College 
by a benefaction. 

Such a one the society trusted to secure in Arthur 
Charlett, Fellow of Trinity. For twelve years he had 
been a Fellow of his College, and had served as Proctor 
in 1683. He was well known as a man in touch with 
learned society, engaged in wide correspondence with 
men of letters, and fond of hospitality.* ' We chose 
him,** says William Smith, 'in expectancy of his being 
a great benefactor ; but I think he lived to be his own 
heir, and left us nothing of his library which he had so 
long promised. ""t 

The choice was made with most careful deliberation, 
and the election was conducted with great ceremony 
and strict regard for precedent under the supervision 
of W. Smith himself. Twice, on June 1 and 16, was 
the day of election postponed. It was determined to 
exact compliance with certain conditions from the 
incoming Master. First, that he should vacate the 
office in the event of marriage within a year (this 
was, however, afterwards abandoned) ; secondly, that 
he should reform the statutes with the help of the 
Fellows ; and, thirdly, that ' in recessu suo ab officio 
magistratus ' he should in no way promote ' a stranger 
to governance. 1 After an attempt had thus been made 
to safeguard the interests of the society, the new Master 

* His letters from eminent correspondents he carefully preserved. 
They used to be known as ' Dr. Charlett's Albums,' and are now in 
the Bodleian in the Ballard Collection. 

t W. Smith, Annals of University College, p. 260. 


was elected on July 7, 1692.* At first he maintained 
his reputation as a freehanded man of means, for he 
is said to have spent of his own money c?200 or 
^300 in improving the Master's Lodgings before he 
had been Master a year. He also encouraged the 
Society in more lavish expenditure than had hitherto 
been customary, and inaugurated his mastership by a 
formal and somewhat extravagant visitation of the 
College property in 1693, for there stands in the 
accounts an item of ^46 13s. ' expended by the 
Master and seven Fellows in ye progress to Marks 
Hall/ Charlett^s inclinations were somewhat too mag- 
nificent for the Head of but a poor College. His 
correspondence with people of distinction and literary 
eminence increased, and his main ambition was to be 
regarded as a patron of letters. Had he possessed the 
necessary means, Charlett was well qualified to have 
played the part of a Maecenas. In his actual situation, 
however, ' his spirit went beyond his income, and could 
not be restrained within prudent bounds.'t 

At first he laboured with a fair measure of success to 
improve the literary reputation of the College. As a 
Delegate of the Press he exercised considerable influence 
on Oxford printing, and encouraged his Fellows to edit 
classical works.J He further imitated Dr. Fell in pre- 

* If anything, Charlett was already too fond of entertaining. 
Hicks, Dean of Worcester, wrote him a friendly letter when he was 
chosen as tutor to Lord Guildford in 1688, with advice to keep the 
College constantly, and make fewer invitations to your chambers, for 
you must understand that all the family are lovers of frugality and 
sobriety, and care not for compotability,' etc. (BallardMSS.,xii. 25). 

t Cf. Rawlinson MSS. 

% Hudson edited Vellenis Paterculus ; Reading, Eusebius; Thomas 
Cockman, Cicero, De Officiis; Francis Rogers, Orationes expoetis Latinis, 


senting copies of those new publications as New Year's 
gifts in the College. 

Through his influence and friendship William Elstob, 
the Anglo-Saxon scholar, was elected Fellow in 1699. 
Humphrey Wanley, probably the best living decipherer 
of ancient documents, afterwards library - keeper to 
Harley and to his son, the second Earl of Oxford, was 
patronized by him and lived under his roof for some six 
years. Dr. Plot also continued to use the College as 
a place of residence, from which he pursued his investi- 
gations into ' natural rarities ' in all directions.* 

While the Master managed the advertising, so to 
speak, of the College, it was fortunate in possessing 
so learned a tutor as Joseph Bingham, not the least 
notable of whose pupils was John Potter, well known 
as a scholar and afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury. 
In the closing years of the century such names in the 
Admission Book as William Reading (matriculated 
1693), Thomas Carte, the historian (matriculated 
1695), and John Thorpe, the antiquary (matriculated 
1695), testify to the character and reputation of the 

Such benefits as the College might have derived from 
the influence of a Master so widely known were much 
diminished by the arrogance of his temper. This seems 

* Plot, writing August 18, 1693, to his 'good Master' from 
Rochester, reports the ' greatest rarity ' he has met with there 
viz., 'a medicine for the bite of a mad dog, which was applied to 
Dr. de Langley, Prebend of Canterbury, his wife, and fair daughter, 
who were all three dipt in salt water a little below the bridge, 
without fig-leaves, last Friday morning, by two lewd fellows of the 
town, the spectators, as you may imagine, being very numerous ' 
(Bodleian Letters, p. 58). 


to have increased as he became more firmly settled in 
office, and caused embittered feeling, and eventually 
permanent estrangement from a section of the Fellows. 
According to Smith, he ( proved of another temper to 
Obadiah Walker, and being bred in another College 
and under different statutes could not well be inured 
to govern himself nor the Fellows by our own statutes/* 
At first he seems to have restricted himself to 
enforcing a stricter discipline on the undergraduate 
members of the College, and made himself a reputation 
for ' sconcing, crossing, and imposing."^ The old rule for 
dining and supping in Hall, which seems to have fallen 
into abeyance, was now made compulsory on all under- 
graduates and Bachelors ; and regular attendance at the 
chapel services, which under the late regime had for 
obvious reasons not been insisted on, was now enforced 
with severity. Punishment was inflicted for non-attend- 
ance at the Sacrament, and, by way of combining instruc- 
tion with penalty, offenders were obliged to translate 
into Latin, Tillotson's discourse concerning frequent 
Communion. In all matters concerning his own dignity 
the Master was a stickler for formality, and appears to 
have succeeded in training his scholars to habits of due 
deference, for we hear : ' 'Tis a custom the scholars 
observe in our chapel to rise out of respect when the 

* Though affecting strict discipline in the control of the youth 
entrusted to his charge, Charlett was, after the manner of the time, 
something of a free liver and fond of good company. Oxford 
society in 1704 was amused by a story of the Master being lit 
home from a supper with the Warden of New by his boy ' Davus," 
who, instead of carrying the lantern, took in its place a silver 
tankard, which was not perceived till the pair arrived at home 
(Observator, 1705 ; Hearne, Collections, i. 215). 

t See C. Usher, A Letter to a Member of the Convocation. 



Master comes in, and to continue standing till the 
Reader begins/* 

Unlike Obadiah Walker, who, when Master, left all 
actual instruction in the hands of the tutors, Charlett 
seems to have personally superintended the education 
of some of the gentlemen commoners. Letters from 
Sir Simon Harcourt to the Master in 1697, concerning 
his son's progress, give some interesting glimpses of 
undergraduate life in the College at the end of the 
seventeenth century. Sir Simon directs his son to be 
sure to spend three or four hours a day ' in his studies 
or in conversing, 1 and watches his progress so closely 
that he desires to see ' all his compositions.' When the 
youth comes to develop a somewhat idle character, the 
father expresses his regret to the Master that he had 
entered him as a gentleman commoner, threatens to 
take him away at Christmas, and 'then instead of a 
liberal education he shall have a servile one, for he shall be 
an attorney's clerk, and owe that misfortune to himself.' 

Some of the natural inclinations of a gentleman 
commoner of the time may be inferred from the 
character of Sir Stephen Fox's advice to his grandson, 
John Cornwallis,t following some complaints made by 
the Master. This advice was to be written out by the 
young man and kept 'as in a manner articled between 
them.'J It was comprised under twelve heads as follows : 

1. He should apply himself to his studies with great 

* See C. Usher, A Letter to a Member of the Convocation, p. 18. 
f Younger son of Lord Cornwallis, of Eye, Suffolk. 
I From a letter from Dr. Green to Charlett, March 7, 1695 
(Ballard, ix. 101). 


2. That he be very attentive when with his Tutors. 

3. That he punctually perform whatever they require of 
him and at their hours. 

4. That he never dine or supp out of the College hall. 

5. That for the most part he goes along with the Fellows 
to their Common-room. 

6. That he never fails of writing once a week to Sir 

7. That he sends a sum in arithmetic once a fortnight. 

8. That he never misses the public Church, and goes 
there at the beginning always. 

9- That he never goes out of the College without his 

10. That he goes seldom to the Tennis Courts, and 
never in the forenoon. 

11. That he never goes to the Tavern. 

12. That once a month he sends Sir Stephen some 
translation out of English into French or the contrary, 
or out of Latin into English. 

Much in need of such a Mentor was Richard Graham, 
who died in the College in 1697 from the effects of a 
fall from his window into the street. His sad history, 
told in letters to his tutor, repeats the old story of 
trouble through bad company.* Still, the offences for 
which the poor undergraduate on his death-bed was so 
deeply penitent were, according to modern standards, 
not of a very heinous nature. 

Charlett's methods of government may have proved 
successful with the undergraduates, but soon destroyed 
amicable relations with the Fellows. The state of feeling 

* Richard Graham was a son of the well-known Jacobite Colonel 
Graham, of Levens. His letters, and those of his tutor, Hugh 
Todd, were edited, with an alteration of names, by F. E. Paget, 
under the title of A Student Penitent oj 1695. 


was shown by the election of Charles Usher to a Fellow- 
ship December 16, 1697, in defiance of the Master's wishes. 

There is no doubt that Usher was not well affected 
to the head of his house, and he appears in time past 
to have given vent to his feelings in Hall by injudicious 
if not actually slanderous remarks concerning those in 
authority. These were now brought up against him 
in evidence before the Vice-Chancellor and Doctors 
assembled in the Master's Lodging on December 17 
and 18. Here the election was quashed and the reckless- 
tongued scholar censured ' utpote moribus indignus.'* 

William Dennison, who later was to play a prominent 
part in another College dissension, was elected in his 
place, but not without great opposition. On one side 
we hear of ' cabals in the cellar ' between Wanley, 
Dennison, and Prickett the butler, and on the other 
four of the Fellows J. Hinckley, Albemarle Bertie, 
John Nevile, and Robert Clavering appealed from the 
decision against Usher to Convocation ; and on the Vice- 
Chancellor refusing the appeal, the ousted Fellow suc- 
cessfully moved for a mandamus against him in the 
King's Bench.t He also published a letter, directed to 
a member of Convocation, in pamphlet form, containing 
a statement of his grievances. : 

* In the course of the hearing, evidence was given as to Usher's 
scandalous utterances, and samples of the evil-tongued scholar's 
fertility of expression were given. Prickett, the butler, swore that he 
(Prickett) had been called ' Pimpmaster-General to the Lodgings.' 
Prickett was a great ally of the Master, and was quite an important 
person. Elstob and Hudson wrote a mock heroic poem in his 
honour. Hearne calls him ' the pragmatical butler of the College.' 

t Ban. Reg., 2, 103, Mich. Term. 

J A Letter to a Member of the Convocation of the University of Oxford, 
containing the Case of a late Fellow-elect of University College in that 
University ; London, 1699. 


Grave scandals and violent discussions followed. 
Things were brought to such a pass that the dissenting 
Fellows ' would neither eat nor drink with us,' and 
talked extravagantly about dissolving the common- 
room and not coming to Hall.* 

The spirit prevalent in the College at this time is 
well illustrated in a letter from John Hinckley to 
Albemarle Bertie, written in February, 1700. Herein 
Hinckley promises to advance some money towards 
(Usher's) costs, ' not only while I am Fellow, but as 
long as I live.' He proceeds : ' I shall always be glad 
to have a finger in every suit commenced against the 
Master and his Doctors, as hating the tyranny of the 
one and the usurpation of the others.' Bertie, who was 
a son of the Earl of Lindsey and had been elected on 
the Bennet foundation in 1689, seems to have led the 
opposition to the Master, with whom he also had a 
personal difference. t He was disinclined to take orders, 
and was now publicly admonished in chapel to proceed 
at the next ordination. No regard being paid to the 
Master's order, his name was struck off the list of 
Fellows by Charlett without consultation with the rest 
of the Society, on July 10, 1701. 

This high-handed proceeding was immediately objected 
to by a majority of the Fellows, headed by William Smith, 
and the matter ended in a rebuff for the Master ; for on 
the advice of the Vice-Chancellor and Doctors being 
taken, a middle course was ordered, and Bertie was 

* Charlett to Tanner, Ballard MS., June 25, 1698. 

f Bertie's contention was that the statutory obligation to 
take Orders did not apply to the Fellows on the new founda- 


granted a dispensation for two years in which to make 
up his mind.* 

Politics do not seem to have entered into these 
disputes, for as a whole the College was Tory to the 
core. Hearne's praise of the veneration that ' this 
excellent Society had for the memory of King Charles 
and other good men friends to the Church of England ' 
sufficiently indicates the opinions which prevailed, t 

A coolness, however, arose between the antiquary 
and Charlett in 1709, and after this date suspicions of 
Charlett's leanings to Whiggism for the sake of pro- 
motion are constantly breathed in the Collections , and 
the erection of Queen Anne's statue over the main 
entrance is jibed at as a piece of flattery with a personal 
object.^ Rumours of Charlett's 'trimming' were cer- 
tainly current in London in February, 1710, but he 
was able to explain his position when accused of shift- 
ing sides. On the Tory Ministry coming into office in 
November, 1710, the Master's claim to preferment was 
strongly urged, and Lord Wey mouth recommended him 
for the deanery of Ripon, but without avail, and he was 
obliged to content himself with a prebendal stall at 
Worcester, which was given him in 1713. As to his 

* At the end of this period of grace Bertie left the Society, and 
was elected to a Fellowship at All Souls in 1704. 

f Hearne, Collections, ed. Dobell, ii. 13. 

The political tone of the Society was quite to Hearne's taste ; ' for 
three or four years he conversed every day in the College, and ate 
and drank generally each day with them.' 

} The statue was the gift of a brother of Ward, the Senior Fellow. 
The following verses were current on the event : 

1 O Arthur, O in vain thou tryes (sic) 
By merit of this statue for to rise ; 
Thou'lt nere an exaltation have 
But that on Prickett's shoulders to the grave.' 


subsequent politics he certainly was not regarded as a 
supporter when Pro- Vice- Chancellor by the Ministers of 
George I. He was taken sharply to task for the rioting 
following the keeping of the King's birthday by the 
Constitution Club on May 28, 1715,* and received from 
Lord Townshend, Secretary of State, < rattling letters ' 
(Hearne, 53, 172), in which it was stated that Charlett, so 
far from discountenancing the riots, had not endeavoured 
in the least to suppress them. Although he was present 
at the coronation as a royal chaplain, his name was 
struck out of the list in March, 1717.t 

Though in the earlier years of his rule it seemed 
likely that Charlett would secure distinction for the 
College by gathering round him men of letters and 
industry, his overbearing temper eventually quite undid 
such benefits as at first followed from his connection 
with the outside world. His indefatigable epistolary 
attentions to men of letters, noblemen, and Church 
dignitaries degenerated into idle interference with other 
people's concerns, and won for the letter-writer the 
reputation of a busybody and the nickname of the 
6 Oxford Gazetteer.' In the Spectator he was ridiculed 
as Abraham Froth, and in his later years his influence 
in the University seems to have declined, though his 
pompous pretensions were never diminished. 

* On this occasion the members of the club had to escape by 
the back-door; their club-room at the King's Head was wrecked. 
Throughout the town the windows of known Whigs were smashed. 
Next day, Sunday, the streets were full of people with oak-leaves in 
their hats, and cries of ' King James our true King !' 'No usurper !' 
' The good Duke of Ormond !' were the order of the day. 

t Charlett had been appointed one of the chaplains to William III. 
in 1697 through the influence of Archbishop Tenison. 


The improvement in the general internal condition 
of the College, which was noticeable at the end of the 
seventeenth century, did not continue into the eighteenth. 
Good tutors of marked ability were lacking, and in the 
early years of the century the entries in the books offer 
no names of men who attained to distinction in after- 

The loss of Bingham as tutor in 1696 proved a 
serious misfortune for the Society and happened in the 
following fashion : Preaching at St. Peter's-in-the-East 
on St. Simon and St. Jude's Day, 1695, some of his 
utterances on the doctrine of the Trinity were pitched 
upon by a Mr. Beauchamp of Trinity, commonly called 
' ye heretic-hunter,' and reported to the Vice-Chancellor. 
Bingham was persuaded to resign his Fellowship to save 
the College from the scandal of a possible expulsion. 
Thus it came about that the most learned Church 
historian of his time was driven to write his monu- 
mental work in the seclusion of the remote country 
rectory of Headbourne Worthy, which he only enjoyed 
through the generosity of Dr. Radcliffe. 

The connection between the College and the cele- 
brated doctor, maintained throughout his busy and 
successful professional life, and not to be terminated 
by death, forms one of the most pleasant pages in our 
history. Born at Wakefield of humble parentage in 1650, 
and educated in the Grammar School there, a Freeston 
exhibition at University gave John Radcliffe the chance 
in life of which he made so full a use. Though he had 
to seek a Fellowship at Lincoln, it was his old College, 
his first means of introduction to academic life, that 
he bore in mind in the days of his prosperity. Few 


physicians have risen more surely and rapidly to the 
top of their profession. He could lay claim to no 
scientific medical knowledge, but he was endowed with 
quick perception, a keen wit, great knowledge of 
character, and had acquired much insight into the 
causes and progress of ordinary ailments. He became 
fashionable and popular, and his readiness and entire 
self-reliance enabled him to gain a reputation for cures 
regarded at the time as extraordinary. His rough 
independence of character, unusual in a Court physician, 
was all the more piquant, and his fame was rather in- 
creased than lessened by the loss of the King as a patient 
through the exercise of his too candid wit.* 

Throughout life he kept up his acquaintance with 
successive Masters and Fellows, and his constant acts 
of liberality to the Society seem always to have been 
prompted by a sense of gratitude for the benefits he 
had in time past received. We find him assisting in 
the completion of the buildings under Obadiah Walker, 
and giving the painted glass for the east window of the 
chapel, and mention has already been made of his 
generous friendship extended to the Master when old 
and poor, out of place and home. 

As time proceeded RadclifiVs benefactions increased. 
He was a friend of Charlett, who ' omitted no oppor- 
tunity of putting him in mind of the engagements he 
lay under,'! and he certainly responded handsomely, 
for in his lifetime he presented the College with the 

* Radcliffe is said to have remarked to the suffering dropsical 
King (William III.) that he would not have his two legs for his 
three kingdoms. 

t Pittis' Life of Radcliffe ; p. 25. 


advowson of Headbourne Worthy, and contributed 
more than ^1,1 00 for the increase of exhibitions. 
Well might the Society, as appears from the accounts 
of 1697, expend 9 4s. 8d. 'in an entertainment of 
Dr. RadclifFe.' His intention to permanently benefit 
the College had probably long taken shape in his own 
mind, for Pittis records his answer to a man of fashion 
who asked him why he did not marry some young 
gentlewoman to get heirs by, ' that truly he had an old 
one (University College) to take care of, which he 
intended should be his executrix.'* 

Radcliffe died November 1, 1714. The bulk of his 
considerable fortune was devoted to specific purposes 
benefiting the University ; but he left ^5,000 ' for the 
building the front of University College down to Logic 
Lane answerable to the front already built, and for 
building the Master's lodging therein, and chambers 
for his two travelling Fellows ;' and the overplus of his 
Yorkshire estates, after providing for the maintenance 
of his two travelling Fellows studying medicine, was 
bequeathed to the College, a resource from which the 
Society has been enabled to meet the main cost of the 
buildings of modern times. 

A public funeral of a magnificence which in Oxford 
had never been exceeded testified to the gratitude of 
the University. The first intention of the executors 
had been that RadclifiVs body should find a resting- 
place in the chapel of his own College, and their request 
to this effect had gladly been conceded. This choice of 
burial-place was changed at the last moment to St. 
Mary's, in deference to some alleged expression of his 
* Pittis' Life of Radcliffe, p. 30. 


wishes, and on December 3 he was interred in the 
nave, the oration over his grave being pronounced by 
S. Lindsey, Fellow of University.* 

In the latter years of his mastership, from 1713 
onwards, Charlett was much crippled by gout, and 
spent long periods at Bath for the benefit of his health. 
So easy seem to have been the duties of his office that 
visits of ten or twelve weeks' 1 duration 'to the Bath 1 
were ordinary occurrences with him irrespective of term. 
General relaxation of discipline followed. Gentlemen 
commoners were under no greater obligation in the 
matter of residence than their Master, and by his own 
account were sometimes so little at Oxford as to be 
rarely seen by him.t The Master was, however, quite 
satisfied with the condition of his College, which, he 
wrote in January, 1715, was 'never more happy in a 
sober, modest, and studious youth than at present. 1 

* A full account of Radcliffe's lying-in-state and funeral is given 
in Hearne, 53, pp. 1-9 : ' He was buried at the entrance of the door 
that goes into the Organ-loft, and the said door is now to be stopt 
up that a monument may be erected where the former passage was.' 
No public monument was erected to mark the resting-place of so 
great a benefactor. His only memorial is the short inscription on 
one of the marble squares of the pavement of the nave : 



See Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford, T. G. Jackson, p. 198. 

| Of Mr. Tempest, a gentleman commoner, Charlett wrote to 
Richardson in January, 1719 : ' I hear Mr. Tempest is in earnest 
leaving the College. He has been so little there that I seldom saw 
him ; but when I could speak with him, which was rare, he gave 
me so good a countenance, such good words, and such desirable 
promises, that he disarmed both prejudice and anger ' (Nicholl's 
Illustrations of Literature, i. 297). 


The sobriety and modesty of these studious youths 
was not, however, to be rewarded by distinction in after- 
life. Throughout the University the period in which 
they lived was (with a few brilliant exceptions) a time 
of intellectual stagnation, which, despite all the Master's 
albums of correspondence and his encouragement of 
classical editions, he was quite unable to dissipate. 

In the first thirty years of the eighteenth century 
among the entries in the College books is to be found 
no name of subsequent note, and in the whole history, 
extending over more than six centuries, there is no 
period of a similar length so entirely blank in its record 
of fame. This period of inglorious barrenness was 
still further darkened in its concluding years by the 
occurrence of most disastrous dissensions within the 

Small jealousies between members of the old Northern 
foundations and that of Sir Simon Bennet had up to 
this time been of frequent occurrence, and had been 
by no means entirely removed by the final union of the 
several foundations under the Lord Chancellor's decree. 
Differences hitherto trivial were now to be exchanged 
for internal dissensions graver than any through which 
the College has ever passed ; and a contest for the 
mastership of seven years' duration was to result in a 
radical change of constitution and the establishment 
by law of the Crown as visitorial authority in place of 
the University. 

On the death of Master Charlett on November 4, 1722, 
there were rival candidates for the succession in the 
persons of Thomas Cockman, formerly a Bennet Fellow, 
and William Dennison, a Percy Fellow, of whom mention 


has already been made. Cockman had been a fairly 
successful tutor, but had resigned his Fellowship, was 
married, and held two livings in Kent. Dennison had 
for long been an aspirant to the office, but was only 
now supported by four of the Northern Fellows. On 
the occasion of the election, December 4, 1722, Cock- 
man gained the day by a bare majority. A formal 
complaint being lodged with the Vice-Chancellor and 
Doctors that the election was contrary to statute, 
another was ordered, at which Dennison, in the absence 
of the Senior Fellow, presided. Here he was elected 
Master on December 17, 1722. But Cockman had 
already been formally admitted, and his name as 
Master had been entered in the Buttery. Thus it 
came about that the College was embarrassed by the 
possession of two Masters at one and the same time. 

Both parties protested to the Vice-Chancellor and 
Doctors, whose decision was given in favour of Dennison, 
and a decree was issued, dated March 1, 1723, command- 
ing the Fellows'* in possession to deliver up the master's 
lodgings. This the supporters of Cockman answered 
by an appeal, not to Convocation according to pre- 
cedent, but by petition to the Crown as ' Visitor of 
the College ' to determine the right of election. This 
course was followed because the Vice-Chancellor had 
shown clearly his partiality for Dennison, and his 
opponents, in order to gain the day, were forced to 
appeal to a superior authority outside the University. 

The petition came before the Attorney-General on 

* Cavendish Nevill and Francis Taylor were the two Fellows 
holding the Master's lodgings for Cockman. See Dr. Stratford, 
letter, February 26, 1723 (Portland MSS., vii. 346). 


behalf of the Crown, and by his advice the petitioners 
moved for a ' prohibition ' in the Court of King's 
Bench to determine the right of visitation. After long 
delays on the part of the law, the following issues were 
joined and tried before a jury in the Court of King's 
Bench : 

1. Whether King Alfred was founder of the said 

2. Whether the Vice - Chancellor, Masters and 
scholars of the University by themselves or delegates 
had used to exercise a visitorial authority. 

The hearing took place on May 10, 1727, before 'a 
full bench of excellent Judges and a Jury of impartial 
gentlemen,' and after 

' a solemn tryal of above eight hours, it was found that 
King Alfred was Founder, and secondly that from time to 
time immemorial to y e time of making y e constitution of 
delegates beforementioned, y e Chancellor, Masters and 
Scholars of y e s d University by themselves or y r delegates 
from time to time as often as occasion required did not 
exercise a visitorial authority over the s d College/ 

The result of this judgment was that the law 
officers the following year advised a royal visitation of 
the College, ' considering the state of the College and 
the necessity of having the present controversy deter- 

There was, indeed, good reason for considering the 
state of the College, which had been in a condition 
bordering on anarchy for five years. The rival parties 
were of such equal strength as to make any settled 
form of government an impossibility. Cockman was 


supported by the Bursar and the Librarian, and so had 
the advantage of holding the keys of the treasury and 
library. On the other hand, the Dean and G. Ward, 
the Lecturer in Greek, backed Dennison, and ' Jolly 
Ward ' was in himself a most boisterous and dauntless 
ally. When Cockman, trusting to the judgment in his 
favour, attempted to play the part of Master in June, 
1727, he found Ward in his chair in chapel, heard him 
read prayers, was struck off the Buttery Book by him as 
Senior Fellow, and suffered numberless other indignities 
from the same source. In the University Church he 
was flouted as in his own chapel, the Pro - Vice- 
Chancellor sending him a message by his beadle that 
4 he desired him to sit in his proper place unless he 
were Master of Univ y Coll., and then he might sit 
where he pleased.' 

It is not surprising to find that the number of entries 
most seriously decreased during this uncertain regime.* 
Fellowships and scholarships had not been filled up, 
rents were being withheld, and leases were not being 

It was fully time to make an end of such a state 
of disorder, and however much opposed some members 
of the College were to see the right of visitation pass 
from the University to the Crown, the first sure means 
of securing a return of peace must have been welcomed 
as a relief, by all. 

Visitors of the College on behalf of the Crown were 

* In 1725 to 1727 they sank to five in each year. After the visita- 
tion settlement they ran up to twenty. The bursarial accounts, 
however, which were kept throughout the period by Browne, are 
quite in order, and show careful maintenance. 


appointed in a Commission* under the Great Seal, and 
the first visitation was held in the Lottery Office adjoin- 
ing the Banqueting -hall, Whitehall, April 19, 1729. 
By way of clearing the air, a lengthy series of interro- 
gatories relating to the recent disputes was administered 
to both parties, and after an elaborate investigation 
the election of Cockman as Master was duly confirmed, 
and the places of four Fellows, two from each camp, 
were declared vacant. 

Since the decision of the Court of King's Bench, 
which, no doubt, was mainly based on the conclusions 
of the Courts and Parliament in the reign of Richard II. , 
University College has obeyed, and is likely to obey, 
the Crown as Visitor without any desire to revert to 
the former order of things. 

One, at all events, unexpected and lasting benefit 
came about from the long dispute. The question as to 
whom belonged of right the power of visitation so 
stirred the spirit of William Smith that, in spite of 
age, infirmity, and the remoteness of his Yorkshire 
rectory, he set himself in his seventy-seventh year to 
write the Annals of University College, with the main 
object of proving that William of Durham was the 
founder, and the University in Convocation the Visitor.t 

* The Visitors named in the Commission, dated March 28, 1729, 
were: The Bishops of Oxford, Bristol, and Peterborough; George 
Paul, D.C.L., Advocate-General; William Chappie, Serjeant-at- 
Law; Rev. Thomas Tanner, Canon of Christ Church; Exton 
Sayer, D.C.L. 

f ' It may seem a wonder both to those that know me, and to 
those that know me not, that a person who has lived in privacy and 
obscurity to the seventy-seventh year of his age, and is so bowed 
down by infirmities as not to have feet to walk on or hardly a hand 
to write, should begin now at this age ' (preface to Annals oj 
University College). 


Though Smith had not attached himself to either of the 
contending parties, and was, indeed, a common friend 
to both the rival claimants, yet his book proved to be 
strongly in favour of Dennison, for he attacked without 
scruple the tradition of royal foundation, and maintained 
the rights of the University in Convocation as Visitor. 

The Annals were published in 1728, too late to 
influence the trial in the King's Bench, but with an 
idea of promoting an appeal on a further hearing of 
the case, which, however, never took place. Though 
limited in scope as a history, owing to the object of the 
author, and sometimes written in a style both involved 
and obscure, Smith's work was the first Oxford College 
history of real historical value, and still maintains its 
position as an authority to which many writers on early 
Oxford have since been beholden. 

The author was very well qualified for the peculiar 
task to which he set himself so late in life. For over 
thirty years he had resided in his college, and during 
the greater portion of this time he had devoted himself 
to unravelling the tangled thread of the history of his 
house. At first unable to decipher ancient MSS., he 
acquired the art by application and practice, and made 
such thorough use of it that at the end of his residence 
in Oxford he was able to boast that he had either 
copied at large or made extracts of all deeds, charters 
and other papers in the College treasury, and that 
not the least scrap of parchment or paper had been 
omitted. The eleven thick quarto volumes of tran- 
scripts closely written in Smith's crabbed autograph 
now in the treasury bear ample testimony to his un- 
flagging industry and careful accuracy. 


Nor did he confine his labours to the documents in 
his own College. Seventeen similar volumes of tran- 
scripts and excerpts from the University documents and 
registers, now in the library of the Society of Anti- 
quaries, bear witness of still greater application. Yet 
all the toil of this indefatigable worker was spent in a 
simple labour of love. But for the dispute as to the 
rightful Visitor, Smith's extraordinary knowledge of the 
early history of his College and the University would 
never have found its way into print. Armed with his 
twenty-eight volumes of transcripts,* the Rector of 
Melsonby was well enough able, from his pleasant study 
looking towards the distant Hambledon hills, to teach 
their own history to the College body, and to lay down 
facts concerning the foundation to the very courts of 
Law. The new history excited considerable attention. 
Though at first regarded by Hearne as ' a mere juggle,' 
closer inspection revealed so vigorous and profane a 

* The various volumes of transcripts were in the possession 01 
W. Smith's nephew in November, 1743. He was then in difficulties, 
and trying to dispose of them. Cockman had hoped to obtain as a 
free gift such of them as related to University College, and the 
Society were ' unwilling to purchase what they had expected to 
obtain gratuitously ' (letter from F. Robinson to Cuthbert Constable, 
prefixed to vol. i. of Smith's MSS. in the Library of the Society of 
Antiquaries) . 

Smith was inducted as Rector of Melsonby in 1704. He died and 
was buried there, at the age of eighty-five, in 1733. The advowson 
of Melsonby was bought by the College in 1672, probably with a 
view to Smith (who was born at Easby, near Richmond) accepting 
the living when vacant. The east front and the north end of the 
rectory house were built by the new Rector in 1706. An oval 
portrait of Smith hangs in the hall at the rectory. This picture 
was given in 1796 by the Rev. Thomas Zouch, who had married 
one of Smith's great-nieces, with a request that it might remain 
at Melsonby as an heirloom in the rectorial house. 


treatment of the venerable Aluredian tradition that 
bad enough names could hardly be found for so daring 
an iconoclast, and he was termed 4 scriptor ille ferreus 
atque mendax. 1 * Smith's laborious proof, happily 
enough for the subsequent history of the College, had 
no influence on the course of events. 

The first important question to be settled by the 
new visitorial authority was a much-needed revision 
of the statutes. The ancient statutes, drawn up by 
many persons at very different times, were in many 
respects imperfect and obscure, and for the Society's 
benefit a rearrangement of the very various existing 
orders into a complete body of statutes was a most 
desirable object. This was effected in 1735, the text 
(in Latin) being prepared by the Master and Fellows, 
and ratified by the Sovereign after some amendments 
at the advice of the Privy Council. These statutes 
served the College until recent times, but in their 
turn were reconstructed in 1853 after the visitation of 
the University by a Royal Commission. 

Master Cockman was a good scholar, and had brought 
himself into notice when a tutor by his edition and 
translations of Cicero de Officiis. He was a man of 
tact and strength of character, for, after one short 
struggle in October, 1729, when the places of three 

* This appears to have been the description of a rival antiquary, 
designed for print rather than an expression of Hearne's real feeling, 
which is found in a private letter to Cuthbert Constable in April, 
1734 : ' The venerable old gentleman of Melsonby was always, even 
when young, very rambling and confused in his discourse. . . . He 
was always a very industrious man, and hath collected abundance 
of things relating to the University and City of Oxford which ought 
to be preserved ' (letter among Woodhead MSS. in Sir Thomas 
Brooke's collection). 


scholars were declared vacant, ' non obedientes magistro 
et sociis, 1 all traces of the recent dissensions soon dis- 
appeared, and, what is more remarkable, his old opponent, 
George Ward, continued in the College for many years 
as Senior Fellow and tutor. According to an unsparing 
contemporary critic,* the Master, was a pleasing contrast 
to the average head of a house in the eighteenth 
century, in being never absent from his charge, and in 
that he ' was revered as a father and loved as a brother/ 
This bears out the laudatory account prefixed to his 
'Theological Discourses "* (edited 1780), in which we are 
informed that 

' his faithful discharge of his trust to his younger students 
with regard to their manners and literature gave weight 
and spirit to his instruction and a grace to his reproof.' 
He further ' attended upon these younger members fre- 
quently at their chambers, giving his private instruction 
and directing them in their studies, and his care was 
especially distinguished with regard to their spiritual 

Certainly this tender solicitude does not appear to 
have been thrown away, for under Cockman's rule the 
College again began to turn out men of some distinc- 
tion. Charles Lyttleton, afterwards Bishop of Carlisle 
(1762), and President of the Society of Antiquaries, and 
Richard Jagot the poet, entered in 1732. Four years 
later came Roger Newdigate, antiquary and benefactor, 
and another antiquary, Bryan Fausset, in 1737. Shen- 

* A Letter to the Heads of the University of Oxford on a Late very Re- 
markable A/air, by Terras Filius, 1747 (Bodleian, Godwin Pamphlets, 
No. 1859.) 

f- Author of Edgehill, was admitted as ' serviens ' July 2, 1732. 


stone was a friend of Jago, but is said to have been 
obliged to pay his visits after nightfall, as it was not 
considered befitting for a gentleman commoner to be 
seen in the company of a servitor. The year in which 
befell Master Cockman^s death was especially notable 
for its entries. In it on the same day were admitted 
George Home, afterwards Bishop of Norwich, and 
Charles Jenkinson, who proved himself a statesman 
and gained a peerage as the first Earl of Liverpool, and 
a few months later there came William Jones (of Nay- 
land), who established himself as a leader of thought in 
the English Church, and helped to forge the link of union 
between the Non-jurors and the later Oxford School. 

Cocknian, described in the Register as Magister 
Dignissimus, died from a paralytic seizure in his 
Lodging on February 1, 1745. As if to make sure 
that after death none should disturb his rest or oust 
him out of place, his remains were deposited * in sacello 
subter niensam dominicam.'* 

The following should be remembered in addition to 
the more famous names of which mention has been made 
in the text up to the end of the eighteenth century : 

ROBERT CLAVERING : Fellow and tutor 1701 ; appointed 
Dean of Hereford and Bishop of Llandaff June 2, 1725; 
translated to Peterborough 1729 ; died July 21, 1747. 

HENRY SOMERSET : Third Duke of Beaufort ; matriculated 
October 29, 1720; D.C.L. April, 1725; died February 24, 

CHARLES NOEL SOMERSET : Fourth Duke of Beaufort ; 
matriculated June 19, 1725; M.P. for co. Monmouth 
1731-32; died October 28, 1756. 

CHARLES LYTTLETOX : Matriculated 1732; appointed 


Bishop of Carlisle March 21, 1761 ; F.R.S. and President 
of the Society of Antiquaries ; died December 22, 1768. 

BRYAN FAUSSET : Matriculated December 8, 1738 ; Fellow 
of All Souls 1745 ; F.S.A. ; was a discoverer of prehistoric 
remains and Anglo-Saxon antiquities ; his collection is now 
in the museum at Liverpool ; died 1775. 

GEORGE WATSON: Matriculated 1739; Fellow 1746; 
theological writer ; died April 8, 1773. 

FRANCIS STONE: Matriculated 1755; scholar; Unitarian 
Rector of Cold Norton in Essex ; adjudged a heretic by 
Lord Stowell, and deprived of his living May 13, 1808; 
died November 1, 1813. 

EDMUND CARTWRIGHT, D.D. : Matriculated 1758; elected 
Fellow of Magdalen 1766; Perpetual Curate of Brampton 
and Rector of Goadby Marwood, Leicestershire ; the reputed 
inventor of the power loom ; after unsuccessfully attempting 
to dispose of his patent, set up a factory for weaving at 
Doncaster about 1788 ; made numerous other inventions, 
amongst which the wool-combing machine ; died October 30, 

GEORGE CROFT: Matriculated 1762, as servitor in Uni- 
versity College ; won the Chancellor's Prize English Essay 
in the first year of its institution ; Fellow 1779; Vicar of 
Arncliffe 1779; Bampton Lecturer 1786. 

JOHN EARDLY WILMOT : Matriculated 1766; Master in 
Chancery 1781-1804 ; M.P. for Tiverton 1776-84, Coventry 
1784-96 ; died June 23, 1815. 

THOMAS MAURICE : Matriculated 1774 ; Orientalist ; Keeper 
of MSS. in British Museum 1798 ; author of Indian Anti- 
quities in seven volumes, published 1793-1800. 

ROBERT BREE : Matriculated April 6, 1775; M.D. 1791 ; 
writer on medicine and disease ; his Inquiry into Disordered 
Respiration passed into many editions ; died October 6, 


SIR HERBERT CROFT: Matriculated 1781; B.A. 1788; 
Vicar of Prittlewell in Essex ; a correspondent of Dr. 
Johnson ; wrote the life of Young in Johnson's Lives of 
the Poets. 

G. STANLEY FABER : Matriculated 1789 ; Bampton 
Lecturer 1801 ; Prebendary of Salisbury ; Master of 
Sherborne Hospital ; writer from an Evangelical point 
of view ; a voluminous controversialist ; died January 27, 

EDWARD ELLERTON : Matriculated 1789; afterwards 
Fellow of Magdalen ; the founder of prizes and scholar- 
ships bearing his name ; died 1851. 

SIR JOHN RICHARDSON : Matriculated 1789 ; Puisne Judge 
of the Court of Common Pleas ; died March 19, 1841. 

WILLIAM LIDDIARD : Matriculated 1792 ; Captain in army, 
subsequently Rector of Knockmarch, Meath ; author of 
miscellaneous works, poems, travels, etc. 

CHARLES THORPE : Matriculated 1 799 ; Fellow and tutor 
1803 ; First Warden of Durham University. 



Masters: Browne, Wetherell, Griffith, Rowley, Plumptre, 
Bradley, Bright. 

THE eighteenth century in Oxford has been compared 
to a valley between the intellectual eminences of the 
seventeenth and nineteenth centuries.* Certainly the 
well-known expressions of opinion by Lord Chester- 
field, who was not going to send his son to the Uni- 
versity 'because he had been at Oxford himself *;t of 
Gibbon, who 'never once heard there the voice of 
admonition ' or ' felt the hand of control,' whose ' time 
there was lost, expenses multiplied, and behaviour abroad 
unknown ' ;J and of Dr. V. Knox, who vouches for the 
fact that ' the greatest dunce usually gets his testamur 
signed with as much ease and credit as the finest genius, 
are gloomy enough evidence as to the condition of the 
nation's most ancient seat of learning at this epoch. 
Such generalizations, however true of most of the 
Colleges and of the University at large, must be 
materially modified in the case of University College. 

* Lord Mahon's History of England, vol. vii., p. 315. 
t Lord Chesterfield's essay in the World, May 3, 1753. 
t Gibbon's Autobiography (ed. 1869), p. 29. 
Works of Dr. V. Knox, vol. i. f p. 317. 


There the last half of the eighteenth century proved 
a golden period, during which the staff of teachers 
was distinguished for learning and ability, and their 
pupils in after-life attained the highest positions in the 
service of the State and in the learned professions. 

John Browne,* Archdeacon of Northampton, followed 
Cockman as Master. He took the oaths before the 
Lord Chancellor (representing the Crown) on March 3, 
1745. Browne had entered the College in 1704, and 
was elected Fellow in 1710. He relinquished his Fellow- 
ship on March 12, 1739, having obtained valuable 
preferment in the Church, which now enabled him to 
fill the post of Master with less difficulty than some 
of his predecessors. 

But it was not to the new Master, though he dis- 
charged the duties of his office conscientiously, that the 
College owed the remarkable uprising of distinguished 
sons which made the name of University most honour- 
able among Oxford Colleges from the middle to the 
close of the century. By either some happy fortune or 
the most commendable exercise of judgment on the part 
of the Fellows, Robert Chambers was elected from 
Lincoln College to a Percy Fellowship on June 23, 1761. 
Early the following year the new Fellow was appointed 
Vinerian Professor of Law in succession to Blackstone, 
and almost immediately engaged in tutorial work in 
the College, and so continued until his appointment as 
a Judge of the Supreme Court in Bengal in 1773.f 

* J. Browne was son of Richard Browne, of Marton in Yorkshire. 
He was Vicar of Aldborough, Yorkshire ; Vicar of Long Compton, 
Warwickshire ; and Archdeacon of Northampton. 

t Chambers became Chief Justice in 1789, and was President of 
the Asiatic Society in 1797. 


During this period he exercised a wide influence. A 
lawyer of deep learning, yet endowed with high social 
qualities, intimately acquainted with Dr. Johnson and 
the most eminent men of letters of the day, his 
presence in the College tended to attract men of 
ability, and his tuition helped to mould the minds and 
stimulate the ambition of a school of lawyers. 

To such a tutor came in 1764, in the person of 
William Jones, one of the most remarkable pupils 
that has ever entered this or any other College. At 
Harrow Jones had won with ease every prize within the 
reach of school-boy ambition, and at the age of seventeen 
arrived in Oxford a prodigy of learning.* From lectures 
in Hall he was excused because of his extraordinary 
abilities as a classical scholar and linguist, and two 
years after his entry, and eighteen months before he 
was of standing to take his B.A. degree, the Society 
showed their foresight in electing him to a Fellowship. 
Jones was no example of early promise ending in 
failure and disappointment. His linguistic talents 
were marvellous. He had mastered Arabic and 
Persian by the time he was twenty. In 1768 he 
translated the life of Nadir Shah into French, and his 
Persian Grammar was published in 1771. Learned 
publications and criticisms on Oriental literature 
followed in rapid succession, and before he was thirty 
he was renowned throughout Europe as an Orientalist. 
He was called to the Bar in 1779, and soon proved the 
versatility of his genius by the publication of his Essay 
on the Law of Bailments in 1781. Appointed Judge of 
the High Court of Calcutta in 1783, he was fired 
* Lord Teignmouth's Life of Sir W. Jones. 


with ambition to codify the existing systems of law, 
Hindu and Mohammedan, and (in his own words) 
6 purposed to be the Justinian of India.'* While still 
engaged on this colossal enterprise, a portion of which 
he actually brought to completion, he died at Calcutta 
on April 27, 1794, at the early age of forty-seven. In 
the noble monument in the antechapel he is portrayed 
in Flaxman's bas-relief as engaged in his stupendous self- 
imposed task.f 

The year of Joneses entry, 1764, was indeed c annus 
mirabilis" 1 in the College history, for William Scott, 
afterwards Lord S to well, of whose great legal fame it is 
unnecessary here to speak, was elected one of William 
of Durham's Fellows on December 14. The same year 
saw also a change of Master, for on August 7 Browne 
died at Long Compton Vicarage in Warwickshire, 
which he had held for fifty years. The late Master 
showed his good disposition to the College by a bequest 
of considerable property.^ By his generosity the 
tenement in the High Street, now called University 
College Hall, was given for the foundation of two 
scholarships and the augmentation of others. 

Nathan Wetherell, who, like Chambers, had been 
elected from Lincoln to a Fellowship in 1750, and who 
at this time was Dean of the College, after a close 
contest with the Senior Fellow, Betts, was elected on 
August 28, 1764. The new Master was destined to 

* Lord Teignmouth's Life of Sir W.Jones, ii. 88. 

f His monument in the chapel was presented to the College by 
his wife; that in St. Paul's was erected by the directors of the East 
India Company. 

J He also bequeathed his books as a foundation for a Master's 

Betts resigned his Fellowship in November, 1764. 


hold office for the lengthy period of forty-three years, 
a longer term than any of his predecessors or successors 
have up to the present time enjoyed. A man of consider- 
able personal dignity, with a wide circle of acquaintance, 
and latterly possessed of very ample means, owing to 
his preferments in the Church, Wetherell proved worthy 
of the time in which he lived, and a befitting Master 
for the now flourishing Society. 

The College was also fortunate in possessing at the 
time a very useful supporter in Sir Roger Newdi- 
gate,* who sat for the University from 1750 to 1780 
a 'half -converted Jacobite,' according to Horace 
Walpole. He never failed to do his old College a 
service on any occasion in his power, and it was mainly 
through his assistance that Wetherell was enabled to 
inaugurate his mastership by carrying out in 1765 a 
so-called improvement of the hall. 

William Scott became tutor and the Reader in 
Greek in the year following his election as Fellow. 
The power he soon gained in the Society may have 
brought about the election of his brother Johnf to a 
Percy Fellowship on July 11, 1767. The elder Scott, 
who was elected Camden Professor of Ancient History 
in 1773J continued to follow an academic life for some 

* Newdigate matriculated from the College in 1736. 

t John Scott had entered the College at the age of fifteen, and 
attended the Grammar School at Newcastle during his long vacation. 
Lord Stowell used to say in after-life : ' I was quite ashamed of his 
appearance, he looked such a mere boy.' In 1771 he secured the 
Chancellor's Essay, which in the first five years of its institution 
had been won on four occasions by members of the College (Twiss, 

$ There was a spirited contest in this election, Scott securing 
140 votes, Bandinel 115, and Napleton 99. 

From a photograph by the\ 


{Oxford Camei a Club 


years longer than his brother, and held various College 
offices from 1763 till 1775, when he was Dean. John 
Scott, on the other hand, resigned his Fellowship in 
February, 1774, and only appears to have held a College 
office in 1765, when he also was Dean. 

The future Lord Stowell as a tutor was a great 
support to Chambers, and seldom, if ever, has so small 
a College possessed two men of such ability engaged in 
tutorial work at the same time. Under these auspices 
the books present a long roll of distinguished alumni. 
William Windham, the future orator and statesman, 
was admitted in 1767 ; Francis Raw don Hastings, 
afterwards Governor-General of India, and Thomas 
Plumer, a future Master of the Rolls, in 1770 ; and a 
number of minor lights, such as James Bland Burges, 
one of the Antislavery Committee and Under-Secretary 
of State for Foreign Affairs ; Thomas Menzies, Orien- 
talist ; John Ingram Lockhart, who won Oxford City from 
the Marlborough interest, and represented it from 1807 
to 1818;* Samuel Wilson Warneford, philanthropist ; 
Arthur Leary Pigott, Attorney-General 1806 ; John 
Sibthorpe,f the botanist, are sprinkled among the greater 
luminaries. The great majority of the commoners at this 
period were of good social status, entered as armigeri, and 
bearing the names of well-known families. 

These were the halcyon days when the company in 
the common-room J was so learned and so witty that 

* Afterwards M.P. for Steyning, and subsequently for Arundel. 

f Author of Flora Oxoniensis and Flora Graca in ten folio volumes ; 
elected Radcliffe travelling Fellow on June 26, 1781 ; original member 
of Linnaean Society in 1788 ; died at Bath, February 8, 1796. 

J Cf. Birkbeck Hill's edition of Boswell's Life of Johnson, vol. ii., 
p. 268, note 2. 


Dr. Johnson was there encouraged to drink three 
bottles of port at a sitting ' without being the worse 
for it. 1 Johnson was no unfrequent visitor,* as he was 
acquainted with the Master and on terms of warm 
friendship with both Chambers and Scott ; here he 
distinguished himself by crushing a wearisome pedant 
with one of his rudest and most characteristic retorts.t 
To commemorate this glorious period a University 
College Club was proposed by the Earl of Radnor in 
1791, and successfully established in the following year. 
It comprised contemporary members of the College 
between the years 1764 and 177&, and the meetings 
were held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern in the 
Strand on the first Saturdays of February, March, 
April, and May in each year. Dinner was served at 
half-past five. There were but thirty-three members, 
and of these eleven were or had been Members of Par- 
liament. Amongst the number were four Ministers, two 
Lord Lieutenants, the Commander-in-Chief in Scotland, 
and thirteen Judges ; minor legal writers and Church 
dignitaries went to complete the list. Their names 
were engraved in March, 1801, as a memorial of their 

* A mezzotint portrait of Johnson, after the picture by Opie, 
given by William Scott, is in the common-room. On the back is 
inscribed : ' Samuel Johnson, LL.D., in hac camera communi 
frequens con viva. 1 

f In November, 1773, in the common-room, Dr. Mortimer, 
described as a 'shallow, underbred man,' repeatedly interrupting 
and contradicting him, 'Sir, sir,' said Johnson, 'you must have 
forgot that an author has said: "Plus negabit unus asinus in un, 
hora quam centum philosophi probaverint in centum annis " 
(Birkbeck Hill's edition of Boswell's Life of Johnson, vol. ii., p. 268, 
note ; see also ibid., the anecdote of Johnson and Chambers). 


Possibly it was deemed that such heroic performances 
with the wine-cup as those recorded by Johnson were 
not good for the eyes of youth, for an order was made 
in June, 1777, that 'henceforth no gentleman com- 
moner should be admitted to the high table or as a 
member of the Fellows^ common-room until he has 
worn the gown of that order for three years.' A little 
later, in December, 1795, a further restriction was 
imposed ' that they be not admitted till they have 
taken their degree.' Very probably the being debarred 
the company of their seniors was no great grievance 
in the eyes of the gentlemen commoners. A junior 
common-room was certainly in existence in the second 
half of the century, and its attractions were likely to 
outweigh any attaching to the privilege of using the 
senior common-room. The inscription ' Univ. Coll. 
Junr. C. Room, 1760,' moulded on a port bottle now 
in the common-room, probably refers to the year of its 
establishment, but there does not appear to be any 
notice of its existence in the bursarial books before 1767.* 

Distinctions in the rank and position of commoners 
were multiplied in the eighteenth century. Com- 
mencing from the lowest grade, there is at least one 
example of a ' sub-corn mensalis ' or ' tabellarius,' who 
ranked between a servitor and an ordinary commoner. 
Then comes the ' com mensalis,' or ordinary commoner ; 
then < commensales primi ordinis,' ' commensales superioris 
ordinis,' and (in but a few cases) ' commensales supremi 

* In a rough account-book of that year Junr. Common Room ' 
appears in a printed list of rooms as No. 12, opposite to Freeston 
1 Scholars' Room.' 


The last gentleman commoner* entered in 1838, but 
the order had been practically extinct for some years 
before that time. 

Under Wetherell discipline was enforced with a 
judicious moderation. There seems to have been need 
for only one expulsion ' propter contumaciam et incor- 
rigibilitatem ' during his long term of office.f He 
introduced one trying form of penalty for minor 
offences, which had for some time been in use at 
Cambridge. It consisted in a public confession by the 
delinquent in Hall. The following form is found more 
than once : 

' Ego A.B. confiteor me graviter deliquisse contra bonos 
mores et consuetum regimen, quippe qui aliquot ante 
noctibus vino immodico perfusus publicam quietem tumul- 
tuosis clamoribus conturbaverim, Hujus delicti me vehe- 
menter et ex animo pudet/ etc. 

At a later period rustication, generally for two terms, 
became a not unfrequent punishment, especially in the 
case of gentlemen commoners. Exercises under the 
title of ' pensa literaria 1 were imposed even on Bachelors! 
at the end of the eighteenth century, and continued to 
be inflicted on undergraduates in the nineteenth, until 

* George W. J. Repton : he was not, however, described as gent, 
commoner in the books. The last entry of Sup. ordinis commens. 
occurs in 1813. 

f The language in which some of the offences in the eighteenth- 
century Register are described adds to their enormity. A scholar 
was expelled in 1754 ' post varias et graves animadversiones causa 
effrenatae licentiae speciatim vero pro intemperata luxurie quam in 
cibo tarn in potu a Collegio expulsus.' 

J In 1782 a Bachelor was admonished ' propter negligentiam 
cultus Divine paene uniformem, 1 and ' pensum literarium a Magistro 
impositum est.' 


the punishment became a farce owing to the work being 
done by deputy. 

The high-water mark of prosperity of the College 
was reached between 1770 and 1780. Chambers had 
been appointed Judge in Bengal in 1773. William 
Scott ceased to act as tutor after 1775, and resigned 
his Fellowship in 1782. Sir William Jones's resigna- 
tion came in the following year. With the retirement 
of men of such mark a period of decadence set in at 
first gradually, but later the numbers became affected, 
perhaps as much owing to the war as to the diminished 
reputation of the College, and in 1800 such was ' the 
extraordinary thinness of the College ' that it was found 
necessary to supplement the cook's stipend by a gratuity ! 
George Stanley Faber, author of Horce Mosaicos; Edward 
Ellerton, founder of University prizes ; and John Richard- 
son, afterwards Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, 
were all admitted in 1789 ; but between this date and 
the advent of Edward West (July 20, 1800), the political 
economist and Indian Judge, it is difficult to find a name 
of distinction. 

Master Wetherell, who had been appointed Dean of 
Hereford in 1800, in addition to his prebend at West- 
minster, died on December 29, 1807, at the age of 
eighty-two. He is perhaps the solitary example of a 
Master of the College dying rich. Of his six sons, three 
matriculated from University College, and a fourth 
became a Fellow. The eldest. Sir Charles Wetherell, 
attained distinction as Attorney -General in 1826, but 
is chiefly interesting as having from his unpopularity 
proved the initial cause of the Bristol riots. 

The Fellows chose as their new Master James Griffith, 



who had been elected a Fellow from Corpus in 1784. 
Griffith was a man of retiring disposition and artistic 
tastes. He had proved himself a competent architect 
in the alterations to chapel and hall in 1802, and was 
devoted to music and painting. As a draughtsman 
he will be remembered from the sepia illustrations to 
Whitaker's History of Craven, the best of which are 
from his hand. Later in life he applied himself to the 
peculiar work known as ' poker painting/ One of his 
masterpieces in this art was so much esteemed as to be 
placed over the altar in the chapel, and examples of his 
skill still remain both in the common-room and the 
Master's Lodgings. 

An interesting description of the Master's habit of life 
is given in the Memoirs of Elizabeth Grant of Rothie- 
murchus. The authoress was niece (by marriage) of the 
Master, and, as a girl of fifteen, lived for a year (1810-11) 
with her uncle in Oxford. Three old servants, a man 
and two maids, did the work of the Lodgings, some 
of the upper rooms of which on the side looking to the 
street were let to men in. the College. The Master 
spent much of his time in a little room furnished with 
branding-irons and other appliances for his curious 
art. Undergraduates were kept at the greatest possible 
distance, ' conversed with never, invited never, spoke of 
or thought of never. 1 The Master's niece, however, did 
not appreciate such dignified seclusion, and an amusing 
tale is recorded of early flirtation carried on from under 
the mulberry-tree (still standing) in the Master's garden 
with a young gentleman with a curly head who played 
the French horn ! (cf. Memoirs of a Highland Lady). 

The headship of so innocent a recluse could hardly 


have been to the interest of the College. All govern- 
ment and control seem to have been in the hands of 
George Rowley the Dean, who was unpopular, and, 
according to Mrs. Grant, responsible for the nightly 
fox-hunting which took place in the quadrangle, ' having 
interfered with such sport outside. 1 Penalties and rusti- 
cations multiplied between 1807 and 1811, the usual 
offence being leaving the College without permission. 

Such was the general condition of things when Percy 
Bysshe Shelley entered his name ' sub tutamine Magistri 
Rowley et Domini Davison 1 on April 10, 1810, at the 
age of seventeen. His father, Sir Timothy Shelley, had 
also been a member of the College, having been admitted 
as one of Lord Leicester's scholars in the year 1779. 
The future poet came into residence in October of the 
same year, and was allotted the rooms on the first-floor 
in the corner of the quadrangle next the hall. The 
fashion in which he kept them is described by Hogg : 

'Books, boots, papers, shoes, philosophical instruments, 
clothes, pistols, linen, crockery, ammunition, phials in- 
numerable, with money, stockings, prints, crucibles, bags 
and boxes, were scattered on the floor and in every place : 
as if the young chemist, in order to analyse the mystery of 
creation, had endeavoured first to reconstruct the primaeval 
chaos. The tables and especially the carpet were already 
stained with large spots of various I ues, which frequently 
proclaimed the agency of fire. An electrical machine, an 
air-pump, the galvanic trough, a solar microscope, and large 
glass jars and receivers, were conspicuous amid the mass of 
matter' (Life of Shelley, by Hogg). 

Shelley's career at the University was limited to some 
eighteen months. In College he preferred seclusion 



and a close intimacy with Hogg to the ordinary habits 
of an undergraduate. Few among the inmates were not 
afraid of his ' strange and fantastic pranks," says C. J. 
Ridley,* a contemporary, and afterwards Fellow; but his 
good-humour and kindness of disposition were generally 
acknowledged. Hogg, however, was most unpopular. 
The climax to the 4 fantastic pranks ' came in March, 
1811, when Shelley circulated in Oxford a small tract 
entitled The Necessity of Atheism. This tiny pamphletf 
in 12mo., containing only seven pages of letterpress, 
with some twenty-one lines in a page, was no jeu 
(T esprit, but a serious though most crude and immature 
attempt to deal with the subject. With boyish self- 
satisfaction the author concludes : ' Every reflecting 
mind must allow there is no proof of the existence of a 
Deity/ Q.E.D. 

When it is remembered that at this time regular 
attendance in chapel and subscription to the Thirty- 
nine Articles were essential conditions in Oxford life, 
it is not difficult to understand that such extravagance 
in opinion and conduct was regarded as an unpardon- 
able offence. Shelley was summoned before a College 
meeting on March 25, 1811, and appears to have given 
indirect answers when asked if he could or would dis- 
avow the obnoxious production. Hogg made a volun- 
tary appearance and stated that, if Shelley had anything 
to do with it, he (Hogg) was equally implicated, and 
desired his share of the penalty. Towards the after- 

* C. J. Ridley entered the College in 1809; was elected Fellow 
in 1813. His letter, undated, describing this affair from his later 
recollection, is now pasted into the College Register. 

f Printed by Phillips, Worthing. 


noon a large paper bearing the College seal was affixed 
to the hall door, declaring that the two offenders were 
publicly expelled from the College for contumacy in 
refusing to answer certain questions put to them. 
Before the publication of the sentence the two friends 
are said to have passed the time walking up and down 
the centre of the quadrangle, conspicuous for the 
singularity of their dress. In the Register the entry 
simply appears : 

'March 25, 1811. At a meeting of the Master and 
Fellows held this day it was determined that Thomas 
Jefferson Hogg and Percy Bisshe (sic) Shelley, commoners, 
be publicly expelled for contumaciously refusing to answer 
questions proposed to them, and for also repeatedly 
declining to disavow a publication entitled " The Necessity 
of Atheism." ' 

The action of the College authorities has been 
criticised as harsh and indiscriminating, but bearing in 
mind the entire intolerance with which any deviation 
from the lines of the strictest and most narrow ortho- 
doxy was then regarded in the University, it is difficult 
to see what other course was open to meet a defiant 
assertion of atheism. The detection of early genius is 
a matter of no small difficulty, and in the simple words 
of Mr. Andrew Lang : ' People who have to do with 
hundreds of young men at a time are unavoidably 
compelled to generalize.'* 

The only other event of importance during Griffith's 
mastership was the close contest for the chancellorship 
of the University in 1809. Strenuous efforts were 

* Oxford, A. Lang, p. 219. 


made on behalf of Lord Eldon by his old Society, but 
in vain, for Lord Grenville as a patron of letters won 
the sympathy and support of the younger members of 
the University, and secured the election against the 
great Tory lawyer. 

As might be expected from the prominent part he 
had taken in the government of the College, George 
Rowley, the Dean, was elected to fill the mastership 
when death overtook the amiable Griffith in his Lodging 
on May 11, 1821. The new Master was a Yorkshire- 
man, born at Richmond, and had matriculated from 
the College in 1799. 

Master Rowley^s term of office, which extended over 
a period of fifteen years, is in no way remarkable in the 
history of the College. 

The undergraduate members apart from the founda- 
tion were at this period mainly drawn from a well- 
to-do and well-connected class, most of them able 
to afford to hunt, and with little taste or leisure 
for literary pursuits. Socially, the name of the Col- 
lege ranked high, but any educational advantages 
it may have offered are difficult to discover. Still, 
under conditions not altogether favourable to the 
acquirement of distinction in after-life, some well- 
known names may at this period be found in the 
Admission Book. Edmund Hammond, for long Per- 
manent Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, entered in 
1820 ; Ashton Oxenden, afterwards Bishop of Montreal, 
and Travers Twiss, in 1826 ; Robert Gray, remembered 
for his action, when Bishop of Cape Town, against 
Colenso for heresy, matriculated in 1827. Two years 
after came Robert Lowe, afterwards Chancellor of the 


Exchequer ; and amongst others, a little later, William 
Mask ell, ecclesiastical antiquary (in 1832) ; William 
Fishburn Donkin, the astronomer ; F. W. Faber, poet, 
friend of Newman, and convert to Catholicism ; and 
George Mellish, Lord Justice of Appeal (all entered in 

The main event of Rowley's mastership occurred on 
the occasion of the Duke of Wellington's installation 
as Chancellor of the University on June 9, 1834. 
Popular affection for the Duke was nearly re-established, 
and on his coming to Oxford he was greeted with 
immense enthusiasm. The Master (who was Vice- 
Chancellor from 1832 to 1836), to celebrate the event, 
entertained in the College hall a most distinguished 
company, including the Duke of Cumberland, the Arch- 
bishops of Canterbury, York, and Armagh, together 
with thirty peers, Bishops, and a host of minor 

Rowley died at the age of fifty-five, October 5, 1836, 
and was followed by Frederick Plumptre, who was 
destined to preside over the fortunes of the College for 
twenty-four years. His distinguished presence and 
stately manners are still within the recollection of 

In the first years of Plumptre's mastership the 
foundation was strengthened by the addition of another 
Fellowship, founded in memory of her father, Lord 
Stowell, through the generosity of the Viscountess 
Sidmouth. Though at first offered only as a by- 
Fellowship, it was later, on the recommendation of the 
Commissioners, attached to the governing body, making 
the number of Fellows thirteen, at which it still remains. 


Subsequent benefactions whereby the foundation has 
benefited, and is likely to secure further advantage, 
have been made under the wills of Dr. Shepherd, Dr. 
Plumptre, and Robert Myers. 

A landmark in the College history of the nineteenth 
century is afforded by the election in July, 1838, of 
Arthur Penrhyn Stanley as a probationer Fellow, and 
from this event may be dated the introduction of the 
spirit of modern education into University College. 
By one of the late Dean Stanley's most intimate 
friends, and his successor in the deanery of West- 
minster, this single election was regarded ' of far 
greater importance to the welfare of that ancient 
society than any that had befallen it for at least a 
century.'* It is difficult to overestimate the services 
which tutors who combine the highest ability with real 
aptitude for tutorial work may render to a College. 
Truly Stanley proved himself a worthy successor to 
Chambers and William Scott, and one whose influence 
may have brought about even more lasting results. 
He acted as Reader in Latin from 1842, and Dean from 
1846, to his resignation in 1851. The standard both 
of teaching and learning found by him was low, and 
reading men were in a small minority. Most of the 
undergraduate members were in easy circumstances, and 
the College was renowned for the number of men ' in 
pink ' it could turn out. Though less than half its 
present size, it maintained a high social position in the 
University, being commonly held to rank along with or 
next to Christ Church, f The alteration and reform of 

* Cf. Dean Bradley 's Recollections of Arthur Stanley, p. 45. 
f Cf. Pycroft's Oxford Memories, i. 119. 


such an establishment in its educational character was, 
under these circumstances, a work requiring the greatest 
tact and skill if the better traditions of the house were 
to be maintained, and at the same time some improved 
form of education imparted. 

Stanley's work in the College was by no means con- 
fined to improvement in the methods of teaching ; he 
sought by all means in his power to extend the general 
educational advantages which life in a College may be 
made to afford, and did what he could to facilitate 
social intercourse among those under his charge, both 
rich and poor, hard-working and otherwise. His efforts 
proved remarkably successful, and the friendly social 
tone which for many years has been, and still is, charac- 
teristic of University as a College may be traced in 
great measure to the work and influence of this popular 

Among the innovations introduced by him was the 
occasional delivery of a short sermon in the chapel 
service. A new influence was thus brought to bear 
on those under his charge, and the first sermon in 
the chapel was preached by Stanley himself. But it 
was in the common-room and among the scholars that 
the charm of Stanley's personality and manners made 
itself most strongly felt; here his intense belief in 
literary and intellectual excellence served to stimulate 
a higher tone of thought and nobler aims. The 
presence in the College of the favourite pupil and 
biographer of Arnold soon proved an attraction to men 
of the same school of thought, and his election was 
shortly followed by the choice of other Fellows whose 
scholarly ability and wide range of attainments was to 


gain them distinction not confined to their own College 
or University. The late Master and present Dean of 
Westminster was elected in 1844, William Bright, late 
Canon of Christ Church, and John Conington, in 1847. 
In 1850 Mr. Goldwin Smith joined the number, a few 
years later the present Lord Davey. 

Under such auspices the College faced the first 
University Commission of 1850, to which body on its 
creation, August 31, 1850, Stanley was appointed 
secretary. As in most other Colleges, there was in 
University a majority viewing the objects and pro- 
ceedings of the Commission with suspicion, while the 
younger and more energetic Fellows were in favour of 
reform. The Commissioners were at first refused a 
copy of the statutes or a statement of revenue, but 
appear to have secured all the evidence required from 
the senior tutor. Their recommendations were brief 
and clear, and reflected the known opinions of their 

The alterations required were : 

That the oath to observe the statutes should be 
prohibited as unlawful. 

That the Master and Fellows should be released 
from the obligation of attending disputations and other 
obsolete practices. 

That all the foundations should be open. 

That the property qualification should be altered. 

That the obligation to take Orders should be repealed 
by law, as it had for the most part been virtually re- 
pealed by the College itself. 

As in the case of all other Colleges the recommenda- 
* Cf. Report of Commission. 


tions of the Commissioners were adopted by University, 
and new statutes framed. These have been altered and 
amended more than once since that time. The statutes 
now governing the College were made under direction 
of the second. University Commission in 1877, and 
became effective from 1882. They incorporate, for 
the most part, the changes introduced by the first 
Commissioners. The repeal of the obligation on the 
Fellows to take orders and the diminution by statute of 
the necessary number of clerical Fellows has probably 
made less difference than might have been imagined in 
the character of the Society, for the original restrictions 
had for long been relaxed, permission being granted to 
the Fellows to retain their emoluments whilst continuing 
laymen. The opening of the foundation to all comers 
by the removal of local restrictions has, on the other 
hand, produced more marked effect, and has probably 
weakened the connection of the College with the North 
of England. Though the Southerners had secured an 
almost equal footing through the Bennet endowment, 
yet up to the date of the modern statutes the character 
of the College remained mainly Northern. The condi- 
tions as to birthplace had always been strictly enforced 
on the candidates for founders Fellowships and for those 
established by Walter Skirlaw. Out of the long list 
of Masters the great majority had sprung from the 
counties of Yorkshire and Durham, and the influence 
they had exercised had drawn to the College a con- 
tinuous succession of sons of Northern houses. Now in 
one case only is the old connection maintained the 
exhibitioners of John Freeston must still be drawn 
primarily from certain Yorkshire schools. 


Master Plumptre died on November 21, 1870, and 
was succeeded in office by the Rev. George Granville 
Bradley, the Headmaster of Marlborough College. 
When eleven years later he was chosen to succeed his 
friend Stanley as Dean of Westminster, the present 
Master (the Rev. J. F. Bright, D.D.) was chosen to fill 
the office and guide the destinies of the College which 
had owned him as an undergraduate. The history of 
these later years must be narrated by another pen ; 
all that the present writer dare venture to say is that, 
when the tale is told, this latter period will be found 
worthy of comparison with any of similar length in the 
varied history extending over seven centuries. 

Especially has the reputation which the College 
established in the second half of the eighteenth century 
for a close connection with public and political life 
been of late years well upheld. Between 1875 and 
1885 it may be said that the sons of prominent leaders 
of almost every shade of politics* in this country 
sought and received their education at University 
College ; of these, not a few have followed in the foot- 
steps of their parents, and four old members of the 
College are to be found among the present Ministers of 
the Crown (1902). 

* Mr. Gladstone, Lord Cross, Mr. Forster, Lord Selborne, Lord 
Salisbury, and Sir Stafford Northcote (afterwards Lord Iddesleigh). 




FROM- its unique length of 360 feet of frontage abutting 
on the much-coveted High Street, University College 
is able to boast possession of, perhaps, the finest site in 
Oxford. The present building, like not a few of the 
most imposing edifices in the city, stands an excellent 
example of the effect to be produced by a happy 
mingling of architectural ideas. Two massive towers 
link together the long range of weather-worn Jacobean 
stonework, and the whole presents to the eye a picture 
of dignified solidity, dark in the shadow, in pleasing 
contrast to the delicate cupola, the central feature in 
Hawksmoor's classical facade on the opposite and sunny 
side of the street. 

The appearance of the street face of the two quad- 
rangles is so exactly similar, owing to the friable nature 
of the Oxford oolite, that it needs a shrewd observer to 
detect a difference of some eighty years 1 date between 
the eastern and western portions. It was on April 17, 
1634, that the foundation-stone of the large quad- 
rangle was laid with all befitting pomp by the late 
Master, then Bishop of Oxford. A full account of the 


initial ceremony is contained in the Register. We are 
told how on this solemn occasion the right reverend 
prelate, raising his hands to heaven, commended the 
place to God's service with a prayer ; the Vice- Chan- 
cellor and Doctors praying beside him with ' many 
others of the better sort," while the Master and 
Fellows stood near clad in their surplices (in albis ad 
stantibas). After this an eloquent panegyric on the 
two benefactors, Charles Greenwood and Sir Simon 
Bennet, with whose money the building was to be raised, 
was delivered in Latin by Abraham Woodhead. 

The new quadrangle was designed to be 100 feet 
square, and the western side, the first portion to be 
undertaken, was in itself a work of extension, being 
built upon land which had been acquired by exchange 
from Christ Church in 1559. 

Preparation for the great building operations had 
been made in the previous year (1633) by the erection 
of a boundary- wall on the west 16 perches long and 
15 J feet high, between which and the line of the new 
building a roadway was laid out, with access by gates 
from the High Street. There was no hurry in the 
commencement of the work, which had been in con- 
templation for nearly ten years, and as early as April, 
1625, ' a reckoning ' had been come to with Richard 
Maud, freemason of Oxford, for the mason work of the 
western side. Various plans for the new quadrangle 
different from that finally adopted (some of which still 
remain in the muniment room) had for several years past 
been under careful consideration. That finally adopted, 
though prepared by a skilled draughtsman, is said to 
have been devised by C. Greenwood himself. No 


architect appears to have been employed. An over- 
seer was, however, engaged to superintend the work, 
and one Bernard Rawlings was appointed to the post, 
and was entertained at the survey of the building on 
April 22, 1634. 

Building operations were carried on with as much or 
more expedition in the seventeenth than is often the case 
in the twentieth century, for in five months'* time we 
hear of the ' roof-rearing, 1 on which occasion there was 
a dinner and a presentation of gloves to the chief 
carpenter, mason, and surveyor. 

The first portion to be completed comprised the 
whole western side, with the return on the north side, 
41 feet in length. The total expense amounted to 
X J 1,405 8s. 3d. The front facing the street and the 
return on the east side was continued in the following 
spring (1635). This portion of the work occupied 
about the same length of time, for we find that the 
roof-rearing dinner took place on September 29, 1635. 
The bargain for the slating was made on July 10, 
1635, with Robert Perry, of Burford, ' slatter, 1 who, as 
in the case of the western side, found slates and all 
material and labour for sixteen shillings a hundred, and 
a penny a foot for the crests. This side of the quad- 
rangle cost in building ^1,651 19s., and, considering 
that it contains the gateway-tower, the increased cost 
is less than might have been expected. The general 
type of the old tower was evidently followed in the 
construction of the new in a ' very singular fashion of 
the pseudo-Gothic of the time. 1 * 

Two sides of the projected square being thus com- 
* Willis and Clark, iii. 288. 


pleted, the Society took breathing-space for a year 
before engaging on the more important southern side, 
which was to include chapel and hall.* The old chapel 
and hall were purposely left standing during the process 
of replacement, so there was no positive urgency to 
complete the work. This was fortunate, as expensive 
litigation was on foot with regard to the Bennet pro- 
perty, and money could not be raised from the estate 
by triennial timber-cutting as fast as it was required 
for the work of construction. f 

When the treasury was again replenished with the 
proceeds of the good oaks of Hanley Park, the building 
of the chapel and hall was commenced, in the spring 
(March 29) of 1637, but proceeded but slowly. In 
March, 1641, ^1,943 had been spent, but the buildings 
were only partially roofed in. A little further progress 
was made in 1641, and then all work was at a standstill 
till 16574 

Adjoining one another under a continuous roof, and 
opposite to the main entrance, the position of chapel 
and hall follows the usual plan of seventeenth-century 
construction in Oxford. The hall was the first portion 
to be finished, the money necessary for the purpose 
being raised under the Parliamentarian regime in 1657. 
The roof was at first in open timber- work, with a 
louvre to carry off* the smoke from the fireplace in the 

* Interments were made in the old chapel as late as January, 

f ^"2,554 was received from the sale of timber from 1634 to 1637. 

| See Wood's Life and Times, vol. i., p. 219. 

A section of the roof, engraved from a drawing by J. Smith, shows 
it to have been of the ordinary style of the time, and to have borne 
a strong resemblance to the fine roof of the Hall of Wadham College. 


centre of the chamber. When, however, chimneys came 
into fashion for Oxford halls in the second half of the 
eighteenth century, the whole hall was refitted (in 
1766), the cost being defrayed by subscription from 
old members of the College.* The open roof was then 
covered in by the present coved ceiling, with its fan- 
tracery in plaster panel ; the two windows on the north 
side, one of which had contained glass painted and pre- 
sented by Giles of York, were walled up ; and the 
present fireplace, the gift of Sir Roger Newdigate, was 
inserted. t The floor of Danish and Swedish marble 
was laid at the same time. 

The plans for this reconstruction were prepared by 
H. Keene, of Golden Square, and the work is a 
curious instance of early Gothic revival. The result ot 
the alteration was to conceal a sound and handsome 
timber roof, and substitute for it a plaster construc- 
tion, in some respects elegant, but impossible and 
artificial as a piece of architecture. Though one 
of the smaller halls in Oxford, up to late years it 
has proved large enough for the needs of the College, 
but if space is to be provided for an increased 
number of undergraduate members, this can only 
be secured by extension westwards of the present 
building. I 

* The subscribers are still kept in memory, their respective 
arms being given in their proper tinctures on the small shields 
attached to the panelling round the hall. 

f This fireplace is said to have been modelled from a monument 
in Ely Cathedral. 

J A plan for the extension of the hall, by the addition of another 
bay towards the Fellows' garden, is in existence, and in it provision 
is made for the reopening of the old timber roof. 



The exact date of the institution of a common-room 
in the College I have been unable to discover. But, as 
in the case of other Oxford Colleges, this innovation 
appears to have followed close on the Restoration, 
possibly the object being to provide such comforts for 
the Fellows as might rival the attractions of the coffee- 
houses, then newly sprung into existence. The present 
common-room appears to have been adapted for the 
purpose in 1679 under the bursarship of Boyse, and 
took the place of another room which it is impossible 
to locate, but which is referred to in the accounts of 
1682 : ' for mending and whiting ye old common- 
room.'' In 1697 the handsome wainscotting was erected 
by Barker, about half the cost of which was provided by 
gifts from the Fellows. In 1865 the addition of another 
room was made, and a passage arranged leading into 
the hall. 

For the chapel Oriel furnished a model, which was 
somewhat closely followed, and there is an item in the 
accounts for an inspection of the work there, then 
recently completed. The building stood partly un- 
covered during the Civil War and throughout the 
intervening period to the Restoration. The seven fine 
windows by Abraham von Ling, whose glass was much 
in favour in Oxford at this period, seem, from a curious 
agreement* with the artist, to have been nearly finished 

* ' May 26, 1642. Agree* with Ab. Van Ling: Rec d then of Mr. 
Obad. Walker the sum of 70 in part payment for glasse work done 
for University Coll., and likewise then agreed that if the College 
did not go forward with their work according to their former agree- 
ment that then Mr. Van Ling shall receive five pounds now at 
Michaelmas next if he leave the kingdom or otherwise before Easter 
next,' etc. 


at the outbreak of the war, but were not erected until 
after the Restoration.* 

Directly the restored Master had succeeded in 
bringing the College finances into some order, he 
proceeded to complete the chapel, which was con- 
secrated by Walter Blandford, Bishop of Oxford, on 
March 25, 1665. In the first instance, there was a 
wainscot roof with some ornamentation,f the gift of a 
Mrs. Reed, who presented ^200 for this purpose ; but 
the interior was not finished until nearly the end of the 

Little by little, as gifts were secured or funds 
accrued, the work of decoration was gradually carried 
out. In 1692 most of the marble pavement was laid. 
In 1694 the fine panelling and rich carving, still the 
most distinguishing feature, was completed. This work 
is so fine and bold in design that it has not unfrequently 
been attributed to the hand of Grinling Gibbons. It 
was, however, really carried out in 1694 by Thomas 
Barker, of St. Giles-in-the-Fields. The carving around 
and above the altar was most elaborate in design and 

The cost of the screen was mainly provided by sub- 
scriptions from the Master and Fellows, who on All 

* Above the Scriptural subjects of the windows are inserted the 
arms of the chief founders and benefactors. On the south side the 
lion rampant of Dudley ; the six batons of Skirlaw ; the fleur-de-lys, 
each leaf charged with a mullet gules, of William of Durham ; the 
cross patence between five martlets of the Saxon Kings. On the 
north side the chevron erm. between three sal tires arg. of Green- 
wood ; the bezant between three demi-lions rampant of Bennet ; 
and the arms of Percy and Lucy impaled. 

f For instance, we find an item : ' Carving 14 angells in the roof 
at 8 1 apiece.' 


Saints' Day, 1693, after dinner, subscribed their names 
in the common-room for various sums, John Hinckley's 
promise of %0 within the space of a year being accom- 
panied by the condition < provided there be no altera- 
tion in our church before that time.' 

Thus completed, the chapel remained unaltered till 
1802, when the decay of the wainscot roof is said to 
have made its removal necessary. It was then replaced 
by a groined Gothic ceiling in plaster. Externally still 
more important alterations were carried out at the same 

In the original design of external ornament of the 
southern side facing the main entrance, the examples of 
Wadham and Oriel were partly followed. The ogee 
battlement was carried along hall and chapel, and the 
space below the windows was but blank wall.* In the 
centre the ornamentation consisted of a semicircular 
pediment with Doric pilasters and square - headed 
windows, and on either side were niches, in which were 
afterwards placed the statues of St. Cuthbert and King 
Alfred. All this was altered in 1802, according to a 
plan designed by Griffith, then Dean. According to 
this, the present buttresses, pinnacles, and oriel window 
were constructed. Although it was the effort of an 
amateur to meet the architectural fashion of his day, 
the result is not unsatisfactory, and considerable credit 
is due to the author. 

In 1862 a not altogether fortunate attempt, under 
the direction of Sir Gilbert Scott, to give the building 
internally a Gothic character wrought a complete 
change in the chapel. The plaster ceiling of 1802 was 

* See Ingram 's Memorials of Oxford, vol. i., 2. 


replaced by an open timber roof. Dr. RadclifiVs 
window,* the colouring and design of which had become 
quite indistinct, owing to its not being stained but 
painted glass, gave way to a new east window, pre- 
sented by Master Plumptre, to receive which the eastern 
wall was pulled down and rebuilt. The elaborate carvings 
were displaced in favour of the present stone reredos.f 
Scott had been anxious to add another bay, but this 
part of the plan was rejected because of the increased 
expense. The smaller window on the north side was, 
however, inserted in order to secure more light at the 
east end. 

The changes thus brought about were, happily, not 
sufficiently complete to destroy the curious but de- 
lightful effect produced by the lavish use of woodwork 
for internal decoration following classical designs. 

Dimly illumined with the soft candlelight on a 
winter's evening, the chapel looks its best ; shadows 
and reflections are produced by the flickering wax-lights 
interspersed amid the crowd of youth, and then but 
little imagination is needed to fill the benches with the 
occupants of other centuries, and the worthy names of 
those whom in the past the College has trained for 
good service, both in Church and State, come quick to 

Music is not at present, and never has been, a main 
feature in the conduct of the chapel services ; until 
of late years it was practically unknown, as may be 

* The tracery for Dr. Radcliffe's window was ill-designed and 
later in date than that of the other windows. 

f These carvings were carefully preserved and erected in the 
Bursary, and the old Communion-table was presented to Huber- 
holme Church (Yorks, W.R.). 


gathered from a resolution of the Fellows in 1863, 
' That it was desirable to introduce some amount of 
music into the services/ The present organ was pur- 
chased in 1865, and was cleverly designed to fit into 
the fourth blind window on the north side.* 

In the antechapel is the bas-relief by Flaxman, in 
memory of Sir William Jones, beautifully executed in 
statuary marble, representing the great lawyer, assisted 
by Brahmins, engaged in translating the Hindoo law. 
By the same sculptor is the smaller mural monument 
to Master Wetherell. Amongst other monuments, that 
erected to Sir Robert Chambers is most noticeable, and 
the black marble tablet to Jonas Radcliffe is most 
interesting, as being one of the few relics of the old 

Of the Masters, Farrer, Charlett, Cockman, Browne, 
Wetherell, Griffith, Rowley, and Plumptre, were all 
interred in the chapel, most of them within the Com- 
munion-rails, their resting-places being marked by simple 
initials with dates. 

The antechapel is associated with a curious custom 
which prevailed till recent times : here, after every 
celebration of the Holy Communion in the chapel, on 
the conclusion of the service, the Master and Fellows, 
standing in a circle, consumed the portions remaining 
of the consecrated elements. 

The erection of the old library and kitchen was begun 
in 1668, and finished two years afterwards. Facing east, 
and directly overlooking the Master's garden, the 
creeper-covered walls of the library, with the long line 

* This was from the design of Mr. P. G. Medd, a Fellow of the 


of windows at right angles to the chapel, and the 
peculiarly high-pitched roof, present the most pic- 
turesque feature of the existing buildings. The room 
was 60 feet in length, 23 feet in breadth, and 10 feet in 
height to the wall -plate, and had a wainscot ceiling. 
As in other Colleges, at first the library was reserved 
for the use of graduate members only, and in 1805 
entrance was still denied to all but those of sufficient 
standing for their B.A. degree. The undergraduates 
seem to have had a library of their own at all events, 
in the second half of the eighteenth century, when 
mention is made of the present bursary being used for 
the purpose.* 

Though the position of the old library staircase was 
twice altered first in the time of Obadiah Walker, and 
again at a later date the room itself continued in use 
without alteration till the completion of the present 
library, when it was converted into the present sets 
of rooms now familiarly known as the 6 Kitchen-stair. 1 
In 1809, what up to that date had been but a single 
chamber in the roof over the library was turned into 

The College owes the present library, designed by Sir 
Gilbert Scott, to the executors of Lord Eldon, grand- 
son of the Chancellor, who, after presenting the colossal 
statues of Lord Eldon and Lord Stowell to the Society, 
solved the problem of housing these Gargantuan 
creations by providing a large sum of money for the 
construction of a library in which they might be 
sheltered. Many sculptors had a share in the pro- 
duction of this massive work. Sir Francis Chantry 

* Gentleman's Magazine, 1786, part ii., p. 6. 


designed it ; after his death his assistant Cunningham 
was entrusted with it in 1812. Both Cunningham and 
Watson, who succeeded him, died before its completion, 
which was eventually brought about by Nelson, who 
was aided in his task by both Musgrave and Lewth- 
waite. The mass of marble weighs altogether over 
sixteen tons, and its journey from London and eventual 
erection was attended with considerable engineering 

The MSS. belonging to the Society, 193 in number, 
were deposited during the pleasure of the owners in the 
Bodleian Library in 1874, simply for the purpose of 
affording facilities for inspection to students desirous of 
making use of them. Masters Bancroft and Thomas 
Walker were the most liberal donors of the existing 
MSS., and the most noteworthy among them are an 
octoteuch written in 1116, once belonging to Thomas 
Caius, and presented by Bancroft, now No. LII. in the 
Bodleian catalogue ; Prisc'iam Grammatical Commen- 
tarii, probably of the eleventh century ; St. Augustine's 
works, written in the twelfth or thirteenth century, 
No. CLXV. ; The Life and Miracles of St. Cuthbert, 
by the Venerable Bede, written in the twelfth century ; 
a York Missal of the fourteenth century ; and two 
chartularies of Fountains Abbey, one of the thirteenth, 
the other of the fifteenth, century, No. CLXVII. 
Though the collection of books in the library does 
not comprise any great rarities, there are many both 
uncommon and valuable. The considerable number 
of early theological works forms the chief feature. The 
earliest printed book is a copy of St. Augustine's De 
Civitate Dei, Mogunt, 1473. A fine Sarum Missal, 


printed by Regnault in 1534, and presented to the 
Society by Obadiah Walker, is noticeable from its 
beautiful condition. There is also a copy of John 
Eliot's Bible of the second edition (1685), printed in 
the dialect of the Massachusett Indians at Cambridge 
(Mass.) and presented by the author to Obadiah 
Walker in 1686. Several service - books and works 
containing instruction in the Roman ritual, with a 
number of other Roman Catholic controversial pro- 
ductions of the seventeenth century, silently point to 
the brief period of Roman Catholic control in the 
College history. 

The eastern side of the larger quadrangle was the 
last to be completed. The foundation of the inner 
wall was laid in 1669, but the work was not finished till 
eight years later. The cost of building, as in the case 
of the library and chapel and hall, was in great part 
met by subscriptions, on the gathering in of which the 
progress of erection seems to have depended. From 
a letter begging assistance in 1676, we find the 
Master vehemently desiring to ' cover what we begin 
this year,' and this desire must have been gratified, for 
the next year we hear of 'the chambers being made 
habitable.'* This eastern side of the quadrangle went 
in the eighteenth century by the name of the Treasury 
Buildings, probably because of the College treasury 
being at that time there situate. 

Accounts were kept by Master Thomas Walker for the 
greater portion of the earlier part of the work, and still 
remain in the muniment-room. Interesting details are 
thus given of the thickness of the walls and the depth of 

* Smith's Transcripts, x. 201. 


the foundation, which furnish a guide to the strength of 
the fabric. The outward walls above the ground-level 
were 2 feet thick till they came to the ( cockloft ' floor, 
when they tapered to 1J feet. The external founda- 
tions on the western side were carried to a depth of 
8J feet, but towards the street this was reduced to 
7 feet 2 inches. The levels were in the first instance 
very different to what they are now : the ground-floor 
of the old building had been throughout below the 
street-level, and in consequence subject to floods. 
Although a considerable raising of surface was effected 
on the erection of the present buildings, still, when 
these were finished, the level of the quadrangle was 
only 2 inches above the street-level. In Loggan's print 
it will be seen that there were then but two steps 
approaching the gateway from the street. From the 
gatehouse - floor into the quadrangle was a drop of 
12 inches, and the level of the quadrangle then appears 
to have been the same as that of the present kitchen- 
floor.* The constant gravelling of the surface in the 
eighteenth century, numerous entries for which appear 
in the accounts, helps to explain how the quadrangle 
has been raised, but the present condition of the street- 
level is more difficult to understand. 

Loggan's print (reproduced in the frontispiece) shows 
the finished work at this stage, and not till nearly forty 
years later did the ancient building there represented 
as abutting on the High Street, and used as the Master's 
Lodgings, make way for Dr. RadclifiVs extension. For 
this preparations were being made in 1716, when the 
Master, in a letter dated March 25 from Hambledon, 

* Smith's Transcripts, ix. 43. 


speaks of having ' left all the houses next my Lodgings 
and in Logic Lane pulling down.'* 

It was finished in 1719, and took the form of an 
80-foot square in almost exact imitation of the larger 
quadrangle, excepting that there were buildings on 
three sides only, the fourth consisting of a wall as at 
present, but at first with a gate in the centre. In a niche 
over the gateway, looking over his quadrangle, stands 
a statue of the worthy doctor, holding in his hand the 
symbolic staff of ^Esculapius; the inscription in his 
honour beneath was composed by Chaiiett. On the 
other side, facing the street, is a statue of Queen Mary, 
corresponding with that of her sister over the other 

Radcliffe's buildings were designed for the Master's 
Lodgings and as rooms for his two travelling Fellows. 
To the first of these purposes the main portion was 
devoted until the erection of the new Lodgings for the 
Master from the plans of Bodley in 1879. Since the 
beginning of the nineteenth century many faults had 
been found with the inconvenience of the Radcliffe 
Lodging, and in 1809 a plan was prepared and nearly 
entered upon for building a new Master's house, facing 
the High Street, on the site of the new (Barry's) 

A portion of the present Master's garden was originally 
the Fellows' garden, and on it numerous small sums of 
money were laid out after the Restoration, Bursar Boyse 
being responsible for the contrivance of an arbour in 
1697. The Fellows appear to have surrendered pos- 

* Charlett to Richardson (NichoH's Illustrations of Literature, 
vol. i., p. 292). 


session of it, and to have laid out their present garden, 
which conveniently adjoins the common-room, at the 
beginning of the last century (about 1809), when 
Deep Hall was pulled down. Of the grove of walnut- 
trees, which was cut down about the beginning of the 
eighteenth century, nothing survives but the name and 
tradition ; they probably grew on or about the site of 
the present tutor's house adjoining Grove Place. 

No further extension of the College was attempted 
until more than 120 years after the completion of the 
smaller quadrangle, when a steady tendency to increase 
in the entries of commoners made more rooms a necessity. 
Since the down-pulling of Deep Hall, or ' the Principality, 1 
in 1809, nothing had been erected in its place. The two 
sites of Deep and Staunton Halls, facing the High Street 
and adjoining the western side of the College, were now 
chosen for the new buildings, the designing of which was 
entrusted to Sir Charles Barry. This work was finished 
in 1842, and by it considerable additional accommodation 
was afforded. The passage connecting the large quad- 
rangle and the new building was practically rebuilt in 
1894, in connection with a chamber for the reception 
of Onslow Ford's pathetic marble statue of the drowned 
Shelley. This work, exquisite in execution, but in con- 
ception almost too true to life for the medium of the 
sculptor's art, was presented by Lady Shelley. The 
gift and its acceptance have gracefully marked the 
restoration of peace between a poet never fitted to 
endure the discipline of a College and authorities not 
perhaps altogether qualified to undertake the education 
of poets. 

In 1867 more room was still required, and to supply 


the need it was determined to make use of No. 85, 
High Street (Master Browne's bequest to the College), 
to serve as an additional building. The house now 
known as University College Hall was at the beginning 
of the nineteenth century, though not for a long period, 
an inn called the Alfred Head.* At the time of its 
being taken over by the College, it was occupied by 
Miss Du Prey, a milliner, and was a favourite lodging 
used by undergraduates. In still later years the Hall 
has been enlarged, and still further alterations, compelling 
its demolition, are at the present time (1902) in progress. 
It appears probable that in the not very distant future 
more important additions may be called for, and that 
generations of future alumni may look out upon the 
High Street from a third quadrangle not inferior in 
grace or magnitude to those whose story has here been 
briefly told. 

For six and a half centuries the growth of the 
collegiate body, the history of which has been here 
so slightly sketched, has steadily proceeded. From a 
beginning, almost pitifully small, its advance has been 
certain. Century after century has marked the increase 
of its borders, its fame, and its utility ; nor is there any 
sign that the period of growth has reached, or is about 
to reach, its limit. 

No great statesman prelate, no sole and munificent 
founder, can claim University College as a monument of 
his piety and zeal for learning. Here, indeed, lethargy 
has never been induced by overgrown endowments, or 
usefulness fettered by too minute regulations ; and 

* So called in a lease dated 1809 


probably disadvantages occasioned by the lack of means 
in the past have been more than balanced by a freedom 
from the inertia following on too great wealth. Built 
up and sustained by opportune benefactions, for the 
most part offered by those grateful for a training 
received within its walls, the College, in later times, 
has been fully enabled to keep pace with the public 
demands upon its resources. 

The future of University may be regarded by her 
sons with equanimity. The Great Hall remains now as 
always the Senior Filia Universitatis natu maxima, and 
still stands ' The mother of all colleges, the nurse of so 
many men reverend Bishops, honourable noblemen, 
and other persons, eminent in Church and State ready 
to continue the same service and to pay the same 
observance as she hath hitherto always done in 
advancing good literature and promoting the higher 



THE seal is a pointed oval, and represents St. Cuthbert as 
Bishop seated on a throne with two lions statant guardant, 
with mitre, lifting the right hand in the act of benediction, 
in the left hand holding the head of St. Oswald, King and 
martyr, and a pastoral staff held obliquely. In the lower 
part, under two round-headed cinquefoil arches, with three 
counter-sunk trefoils in the spandrils, is the founder, 
William of Durham, turned to the right in three-quarter 
length, a book in his right hand, the left hand raised, in 
converse with a group of four scholars on the right. The 
inscription round the seal is : 


It is difficult to arrive at the exact date when the Society 
was first in possession of a corporate seal. In William 
Smith's opinion a seal was certainly in existence before 
1320. A grant of a certain tenement by the Master and 
scholars of University Hall to the founder of Queen's 
College, dated May 19, 1340, has been exhibited to the 
writer through the courtesy of the Provost of Queen's 
College, and to it is attached a good impression of the 
seal as above described. The most ancient deed bearing 


the seal now among the College papers is a deed of release 
between John Norton 'le Major* and the Master and 
scholars, dated 1356. 

The borrowing of a seal for some of the earlier deeds is 
no evidence of the College not possessing one of its own, 
as we find this borrowing in later years ; thus, in a deed 
dated January 10, 1369, we find : ' Sigillum nostrum com- 
mune ad manus non habentes sigillum decani Chris- 
tianitatis Oxon. affixi praesentibus procuravimus.' 

The original brass seal of the society, though now broken 
in half, remains in the College Treasury. 

The arms borne by University are : Azure a cross patence 
between four or five martlets or. 

The early royal emblem borne by the Anglo-Saxon 
Kings seems to have been a cross (not necessarily patence) 
surrounded by as many birds (four or five martlets) as the 
field would conveniently permit (Notes on the Heraldry oj 
Oxford Colleges, P. Landon, p. 149). 

In the Gatherings of Oxfordshire of Richard Lee (Port- 
cullis), 1579, among the arms mentioned as then in the 
College hall, they are described as : ' Azure a cross fleurie 
between four martlets or, ensigned with a crown,' over it 
written ' Alphered kynge of Saxons founded this College 
879-' A print of them appears in the little volume entitled 
Ilium in Italiam, 1608, which gives the arms of the various 
Colleges, together with laudatory verses in honour of 
James I. 

The arms of the founder, William of Durham or a fleur- 
de-lis azure, each leaf charged with a mullet gules were 
in its earliest years almost certainly borne by the College, 
and at the time of Richard Lee's visitation were to be 
found in prominent places. It appears probable that these 
Durham bearings were abandoned for the Saxon royal arms 
about the beginning of the fifteenth century. 



The portraits in the College Hall are at present hung 
as follows : 

Over the entrance doorway a full-length portrait of Sir 
Roger Newdigate, by Kirkby. 

On the left side 011 entrance, Sir William Jones, a copy 
by J. Linnell of the portrait by Sir J. Reynolds ; Charles 
Jenkinson, Earl of Liverpool, a copy of the portrait by 
Romney; Chauncy Maples, Bishop of Likoma ; the Earl 
of Radnor ; the Marquis of Hastings, by Hoppner ; Sir 
John Richardson, by Phillips ; Dean Stanley, by Eddis ; 
John Scott, Earl of Eldon, by Owen ; William Scott, Lord 
Stowell, by Hoppner ; Sir Robert Chambers ; and George 
Abbot, Archbishop of Canterbury. 

On the right side on entrance, Sir Simon Bennet ; Dr. 
John Radcliffe ; Sir Edward Hales, by Lely ; John Potter, 
Archbishop of Canterbury ; George Home, Bishop of 
Norwich ; William Windham, by Lawrence ; Master F. G. 
Plumptre, by Eddis ; Sir Thomas Plumer ; and John 
Bancroft, Bishop of Oxford, and Master in 1609- 

In the Master's Lodgings are the following portraits : 

The first Earl of Leicester, the gift of Philip, Earl of 
Leicester, in 1 693, attributed to Zucchero ; George Abbot, 
Archbishop of Canterbury; John Bancroft, Bishop of 
Oxford; Sir Simon Bennet; and King Alfred and his 
Queen on small oak panels. Here is also a second portrait 
of the Saxon King very curiously painted on glass. There 
are engraved portraits of the following : Charles, Earl of 
Liverpool ; John Potter, Archbishop of Canterbury ; Sir 
Robert Chambers ; Lord Stowell ; Lord Eldon ; William 
Windham ; Francis, Marquis of Hastings ; Charles Thorpe, 
Archdeacon of Durham ; Samuel Warneford ; Robert Gray, 



Bishop of Capetown ; George Abbot, Archbishop of 
Canterbury; George Shepherd, D.D. ; John Hudson, 
D.D. ; Robert Clavering, Bishop of Peterborough ; Lord 
Herbert of Cherbury ; the Rev. William Jones ; Sir 
William Jones ; Sir Thomas Plumer, Master of the Rolls ; 
George Home, Bishop of Norwich ; and John Radcliffe, 


A curious custom called ' chopping the block ' took place 
annually on Easter Sunday until 1864, when it was decided 
in College meeting ' that chopping the block on Easter 
Sunday be discontinued.' This odd ceremony took place 
after dinner. The cook and his assistants, with their block 
decorated with flowers, stood in the Hall passage in wait 
for the members of the foundation as they left the Hall. 
Each in turn was presented with a dull cleaver, with 
which he aimed one blow at the block, and returning the 
cleaver to the cook, presented him with a dole. Whatever 
had been the origin of the custom, it had degenerated 
into a ceremonial feeing of the cook. 

The wakening of the occupants every morning by beat- 
ing at the foot of each staircase with a heavy stick is a 
habit still maintained in the College. 



During the early years of Oxford rowing and cricket, 
University played a leading part, and, considering the 
smallness of the College, won more than its due share of 
distinction in these pursuits. Unfortunately, the records 
for the first half of the century, if any were ever kept, are 
no longer in existence, and those dealing with more recent 
times are both scanty and disjointed. The history of the 
boat club from 1864 to 1890 is contained in a small note- 
book (with the title Univ. Coll. Boat Club printed on 
the back), which deals with the period between 1864 
and 1890. From 1890 up to present times the record has 
been preserved in a more imposing quarto volume. 

The College first put a boat in the river for the Eights 
in 1827, and rowed head of the river for the first time in 
1841. This early success was greatly due to the presence 
in the College of Calverley Bewicke, stroke of the Oxford 
boat and first president of the O.U.B.C. 

University was among the first of the Colleges to 
establish their boating headquarters in a barge on the 
river, and in 1854 purchased from the O.U.B.C. the 
Merchant Taylor's barge, which the Club had bought for 
the Company in 1846. In 1879 the present barge was 
built, a loan for the purpose being made by kindly friends, 
and the old barge handed on to another College. 

The most famous period in the history of our boat club 
is the decade following and including 1869. In seven of 
these ten years University College rowed head of the river. 
On the occasion of one of these triumphs, when the College 
had rowed head the third time in succession, words fail the 
boat club chronicler, whose spirited account of the races 
wildly ends, ' Hooroo ! Hooroo ! Well rowed everybody ! 
Splice the main brace !' 













/89 /. 





THE RIVER FROM 1827 TO 1902. 


The accompanying chart shows the position of the Eight 
on the river from the earliest days. The descent from its 
position of great estate was painfully steady and complete, 
but the chart seems to show that the Eight is again moving 
with almost equal certainty to its old position of superiority.* 

A goodly number of members of the College have in their 
time rowed for the University ; their names are as follows : 

Calverley Bewicke (stroke) 1839 

Sir R. Menzies 1842-3 

F. N. Menzies 1842-3 

H. Denne 1852 

R. H. Denne 1853-5 

T. H. Craster 1855 

P. Gurdon 1856 

W. H. Wood 1857-8 

C. T. Strong I860 

J. N. Macqueen I860 

F. H. Kelly 1863-4 

A.E.Seymour 1864 

W. W. Wood 1866-7 

J. C. Tinn6 1867-9 

W, P. Bowman 1867 

S. H. Woodhouse 1869-71 

R. W. B. Mirehouse 1870 

A. V. P. Lewis 1870 

J. E. Bankes 1875 

J. M. Boustead 1875-7 

G. D. Rowe 1879-80 

W. H. Hewett 1892 

L. Portman (cox. ) 1893-4 

E. R. Balfour 1896-7 

F. O. J. Huiitley 1901-2 

H.W.Adams ... , 1902 

* Since this was written the College boat has again become the 
head of the river, bumping New College on the second night of the 
Eights, May 23 


The following are the names of the University College 
crews who have rowed head of the river : 

H. E. C. Stapylton (bow). 

2. F. Watt. 

3. H. Gray. 

4. R. Menzies. 

5. C. E. Tilney. 

E. H. H. Vernon (bow). | 6. 

2. H. E. C. Stapylton. 

3. R. B. Mansfield. 

4. H. A. Wake. 

5. A. Gray. 

S. R. Osborne (bow). 

2. Hon. J. C. Gordon. 

3. F. H. Wilson. 

4. A. W. Edwards. 

5. J. C. Tinne. 

S. R. Osborne (bow). 

2. Hon. J. C. Gordon. 

3. F. H. Wilson. 

4. A. W. Edwards. 

5. J. C. Tinne. 

S. R. Osborne (bow). 

2. H. M. Evans. 

3. S. le Blanc-Smith. 

4. A. W. Edwards. 

5. G. A. Holme. 





H. J. Torre. 

W. Bolland. 

F. N. Menzies (stroke). 

A. W. Mackintosh (cox.). 

J. T. Lea. 

R. Menzies. 

F. N. Menzies (stroke). 

A. W. Mackintosh (cox.). 

R. W. B. Mirehouse. 

A. G. P. Lewis. 

S. H. Woodhouse 

A. Hill (cox.). 

A. G. P. Lewis. 

R. W. B. Mirehouse. 

S. H. Woodhouse 

A. Hill (cox.). 

H. G. P. Lewis. 
S. H. Woodhouse. 
H. S. Daniell (stroke). 
H. W. Claughton (cox.). 




H, S. Daniell (bow). 

2. A. R. H. Saunders. 

3. T. H. Hall. 

4. J. M. Boustead. 

5. E. H. Burrows. 

W. Fell (bow). 

2. W. A. Ellison. 

3. T. H. Hall. 

4. A, R. H. Saunders. 

5. H. J. Preston. 

W. Fell (bow). 

2. C. C. Mills. 

3. M. Power. 

4. F. H. Capron. 

5. W. H. Cross. 

C. C. Mills (bow). 

2. L. H. Jenkins. 

3. S. Sandbach. 

4. M. Power. 

5. F. H. Capron. 

6. J. E. Bankes. 

7. H. J. Preston. 

W. P. Johnson (stroke). 
P. S. Smith (cox.). 


6. J. M. Boustead. 

7. J. E. Bankes. 

W. P. Johnson (stroke). 
P. S. Smith (cox.). 


6. G. D. Rowe. 

7. S. Sandbach. 

W. A. Ellison (stroke). 
V. H. Veley (cox.). 


6. G. D. Rowe. 

7. W. H. Cross. 

W. A. Ellison (stroke). 
P. S. Smith (cox.). 

The Fours have been won by the College in the following 
years: 1841, 1842, 1844, 1859, 1862, 1864, 1865, 1866, 
1867, 1868, 1873, 1875. The Pairs in 1839, 1841, 1872. 
And the Sculls in 1863. 

At Henley the Ladies' Plate was won in 1862, 1863, 
1901; the Grand Challenge Cup, 1863; the Stewards' 


Cup, 1863, 1866, 1867; the Visitors' Cup, 1864, 1866, 
1867, 1868, 1869, 1875, 1876; the Diamond Sculls in 
1901 by E. G. Hemmerde ; the Goblets in 1897 by E. R. 
Balfour, University, with G. Nickalls, Magdalen. 


Though perhaps not quite so distinguished in cricket as 
on the river, the College can claim in the past some notable 
cricketers, and contributed two members to the first 
Oxford eleven which played Cambridge in 1827. 

The following members of University College have 
played for the University against Cambridge : 

D. H. Denne, 1827 ; J. Papillon, 1827 ; F. L. Popham, 
1829; H. J. Torre, 1839-40; C. R. F. Lock, 1846, 1848; 
M. Jones, 1849-50 ; R. A. Clement, 1853 ; E. P. Bateman, 
1854-5; B. W. Waud, 1857-60; H. D. Reade, 1861-2; 
W. H. Lipscomb, 1868 ; C. W. Boyle, 1873 ; E. S. Gamier, 
1873; A. H. Pearson, 1876-7; A. Hasket-Smith, 1879; 
E. A. Nepean, 1887-8; E. Smith, 1890-1; G. J. Mor- 
daunt, 1893-6 (Captain in 1895); R. P. Lewis, 1894-6; 
R. E. Foster, 1897-1900 (Captain in 1900); E. C. Lee, 
1898 ; R. A. Williams, 1901 ; E. W. Dillon, 1901. 


The names of those members of the College who have 
represented the University in the Rugby and Association 
games follow : 

G. E. Vecqueray, Rug., 1873 ; H. E. B. Harrison, Rug., 
1874-5; F. H. Birley, Assoc., 1874; C. F. Harrison, Rug., 
1874-5; F. F. Johnson, Rug., 1875; C. H. T. Metcalfe, 
Assoc., 1875-6; A. F. Hill, Assoc., 1877; J. T. Twist, 
Assoc., 1877; A. H. Vecqueray, Rug., 1879; E. B. Vin- 
cent, Assoc., 1879; C. P. Allen, Rug., 1881-3; E. F. 


Hardman, Assoc., 1883; R. E. Inglis, Rug., 1884 
P. Coles, Rug., 1884-6; P. Christopherson, Rug., 1886-8; 
E. R. Balfour, Rug., 1893-4 (Assoc., 1895); A. G. Gibson, 
Rug., 1894-5; F. T. Reid, Rug., 1896-7; T. A. Nelson, 
Rug., 1898 ; R. E. Foster, Assoc., 1898-9; J. E. Crabbie, 
Rug., 1898-1901 ; G. E. Wilkinson, Assoc., 1900-2 ; H. F. 
Terry, Rug., 1900-1 ; N. Kennedy, Rug., 1901 ; A. J. 
Swanzy, Rug., 1901. 

In athletic sports the following have represented the 
University against Cambridge : 

C. Bill, 1864 ; W. P. Bowman, 1866, 1868 ; W. Hedley, 
1867; E. S. Garnier, 1870-3; E. M. Prothero, 1870-2; 
R. O. Surtees, 1875-6; C. G. Steel, 1876; C. H. S. 
Metcalfe, 1876-7; A. F. Hills, 1877-9; C. M. Hawker, 
1881-2 ; J. H. A. Marshall, 1884-6 ; W. Gordon, 1889-90 ; 
A. A. Allen, 1890; E. D. Swanwick, 1891-4; E. G. 
Hemmerde, 1893-4; G. Jordan, 1894-7 (President, 1896) ; 
G. M. T. Hildyard, 1894-7 ; W. H. Hallowes, 1895 ; G. J. 
Mordaunt, 1896; H. G, Robertson, 1898; F. H. K. 
Dashwood, 1899; C. F. Struben, 1899-1900; G. R. 
Fothergill, 1900-1. 

In other sports the University has been represented by 
the following members of the College : 


C. H. Kennard, 1861-3; C. L. Kennaway, 1868-9; 
F. A. Jones, 1880 ; F. O. H. Clayton, 1895 ; R. E. Foster,* 
1897-8; R. A. Williams/ 1899; L. F. Andrews,- 1900. 


Lord R. E. A. Cecil, 1885-6; E. A. Biederman, 1898- 
1900; A. M. Roberts, 1901. 

* Also played in singles. 



J. G. Horn, 1881-3; C. B. Russel, 1882-3; H. J. Rash- 
leigh, 1882-3. 


C. K. Mackenzie, 1878; F. M. Hunter, 1897-8; R. E. 
Foster, 1897-8: E. C. Lee, 1898-1900. 


F. Edwards, 1880; G. P. S. Payne, 1880; G. Atten- 
borough, 1896; P. M. Baines, 1897; G. R. Fothergill, 


H. M. Lewis, 1890; H. Davies, 1890-1 ; C. H. Finch, 
1890-1 ; F. B. Hicks, 1891 ; R. Unsworth, 1892-3; C. Q. 
Causton, 1893. 


Hon. H. C. Plunkett, 1874-7 ; G. E. Wainwright, 1881-4- ; 
C. D. Locock, 1882-6. 


ABBOT, George, Master : his election, 92 ; 
character, 95 and note ; Bishop of Lich- 
field and of London, 97; resigns his 
mastership, 98 ; his approval of sports, 
100 ; his discipline, 102 ; his portrait in 
the hall and in the Master's Lodgings, 

Abraham von Ling : his windows in the 
chapel, 210 and note, 211 

Adam de Marisco, 15 

Addington, William, 87 

Alfred : reputed founder of the College, 
1-8, 41, 43, 50, 174; his figure in an old 
window, 6, 66 ; notes to Spelman's 
Life of Alfred, by Obadiah Walker, 134, 
135 ; his arms in the old College hall, 
224; his statue, 7, 148 note, 212 ; his 
portrait on oak panel, 7, 225 

Alice Bellasis, benefactress, 63 

Annand, William, 154 

Anne, Queen : her statue, 166 note, 

Anne of Warwick, Masses to be sung for, 
63 note 

Appleton, John, Master, 53 ; connection 
with the library, 51 ; character, 57 ; 
gratitude of the College to him in his 
old age, 58 

Arms of the College, 224 

Arms of William of Durham, 224 

Arncliffe, rectory of, given by the Earl 
of Northumberland, 62, 109 

Arundel, Archbishop, 54, 55, 56 

Aspylon, William : gift to the library, 

Aswardby, Roger, the first Master, 31, 

Athletics, 100, 101, Appendix B, 227-2 

Aula Univcrsitatis, 14, 32, 86 

BACHELORS : first admitted, 70, 71; under 
discipline, 70, 192 

Baconthorpe, John, 52 

Bancroft, John, Master, 95 ; appointed 
by Archbishop Bancroft, 98 ; his re- 
forms, 99 ; his approval of shooting, 
101 ; his love of building, 102 ; mado 
Bishop of Oxford, resigns the master- 
ship, 103 ; lays the foundation of the 
west quadrangle, 205, 206 ; presented 
MSS. to the library, 216 ; his portrait 
in the hall and in the Master's Lodg- 
ings, 225 

Bancroft, Richard, Archbishop, 98 

Barker, Thomas, 210, 211 

Barneby, disputed election, expelled, 

Basset, Alan, 14 

Beaufort, Cardinal : consecrates the 
chapel, 50 ; his legacy, 63 

Bede, mentioned in the 'French peti- 
tion,' 42, 43 

Bedford, Earl of : his bequest, 90 

Bee, Matthew : elected Fellow, 115 

Benefactors : William of Durham, 8-15 ; 
Philip Ingleberd of Beverley, 32, 33 ; 
Robert de Riplingham, 34, 35 ; Robert 
Caldwell, 37, 38, 47 ; Walter Skirlaw, 
51, 57, 58 ; Earl of Northumberland, 
62 ; Alice Bellasis, 63 ; Cardinal Beau- 
fort, 63 ; Henry VII., 63 note; Joanna 
Danvers, 65 ; Thomas Gold and John 
Huet, 88, 89 ; Simon Perrot, 90 ; Earl 
of Leicester, 89, 90 and note ; Thomas 
Browne, 90 ; John Freeston, 91, 92; 
Robert Gunsley, 102, 103 ; Sir Simon 
Bennet, 104, 105 ; Charles Greenwood, 
105, 119 ; Edward Farrer, 157 ; William 
Hopkins, 157 note; John Radcliffe, 



169, 170 ; John Browne, 187 and note ; 
Roger Newdigate, 188 ; Viscountess 
Sidmouth, 199 

Benet, Thomas : elected Fellow, 137 ; 
Master, 156 ; death, 157 

Bennet, Sir Simon : matriculates, 97 ; 
his benefactions, 103-105 and note, 
124, 172, 203, 206; his arms in the 
chapel window, 211 note ; his portrait 
in the hall and in the Master's Lodg- 
ings, 225 

Benyngwell, Thomas, Master, 53, 61 

Bernard, John, 139, 140 note 

Bertie, Albemarle, 164-166 note 

Best, John, 87 

Betts, Senior Fellow, 187 and note 

Beverley, Philip of, 32, 33 

Bingham, Joseph, 160, 168 

Bingley, Michael, 138 

Blandford, Bishop of Oxford : conse- 
crates the chapel, 211 

Boat : its position on the river, 227-232 

Boyse, Nathaniel: his sermon, 138 and 
note; a royal dispensation granted 
him, 139 ; goes abroad, 151 ; his work 
as Bursar, 210 

Bradley, Dean of Westminster: 
quoted, 200; elected Fellow, 202; 
Master, 204 

Brasenose Hall purchased, 18, 14 

Bredon, Simon : his legacy, 50 note 

Bree, Robert, 182 

Bright, James Franck, Master, 204 

Bright, William : elected Fellow, 202 

Browne, John, Master, 184, 185; his 
benefaction, 187, 221 ; his books, 187 
note ; buried In the chapel, 214 

Browne, Thomas, 90 

Browne, Dr., Bursar, 98 

Buildings. See University 

Burgee, James, 189 

Bursar, payment to, 22, 24 ; work of, 24, 
30, 36, 70, 71, 87 ; money difficulties 
of, 96, 98, 99, 102, 106 

Burton, Robert, Master, 53 ; threatened 
with excommunication, 55 

CAIUS, John, of Cambridge, 86 

Caius, Thomas, Master, 74 ; asserts the 
royal foundation, 5 and note; a true 
Protestant, 81 and note; his various 
offices, 82 ; elected Master, his charac- 
ter and scholarship, 85 ; upholds the 
antiquity of Oxford, 85, 86 ; receives 
Queen Elizabeth, 86 ; death, 87 ; his 
MSS. in tho Bodleian, 216 

Caldwell, Robert, 37, 38 

Carte, Thomas, 155, 160 

Cartwright, Edmund, 182 

Castle, John, Master, 53 ; character, 59 ; 
Chancellor of the University, 60 

Catherine Parr, 81 note 

Chambers, Humphrey, 153 

Chambers, Sir Robert : elected Fellow, 
185 and note ; his character, 186 ; 
friend of Dr. Johnson, 190 ; becomes a 
Judge, 193 ; his monument, 214 ; his 
portrait in tho hall and in the Master's 
Lodgings, 225 

Chandler, Thomas, 68-70 

Chantry, Sir Francis, 215 

Chapel, the old : dedicated to St. Cuth- 
bert, 4 ; windows, 6, 66, 67 ; conse- 
crated by Cardinal Beaufort, 50 ; en- 
larged, 65 ; daily prayers in, 91 ; the 
Fellows met in, 96, 149 ; collections in, 
100 ; cushions in, 105 ; burials in, 116 ; 
services in, 137, 141, 147, 149 

Chapel, the Roman Catholic : plan for 
building, 139 ; rooms taken for, 141, 
142 and note; King James attends 
vespers in, 145 ; disturbance in, 147 
and note; shut up, 147, 151 

Chapel, the present : begun and conse- 
crated, 125 ; customs in, 161 ; first east 
window, 169 ; monuments in, 187 and 
note ; attendance in compulsory, 196 ; 
sermons in introduced, 201 ; the win- 
dows, 210 ; the carving, 211 ; the 
plaster roof, 212 ; the timber roof, 213 ; 
burials in, 214 

Chapernay Charter, 42 note 

Charles I. : preparations for his visit, 
105 ; College plate given him, 107, 108 ; 
loyalty to, 109, 110 

Charlett, Arthur, Master, 156 ; reasons 
for his election, 158 and note; his 
lavish expenditure, 159 and note ; his 
literary reputation, 160 ; his strict 
discipline, 161, 162 ; his relations with 
the Fellows, 163-165; his politics 
and character, 166, 167 ; obtains bene- 
faction from Dr. Radcliffe, 1(39 ; his 
illness, 171 ; death, 172 ; buried in the 
chapel, 214 ; his inscription for Dr. 
Radcliffe's statue, 218, 219 

Charters : Queen Elizabeth's, 18, 89 ; 
Chapernay, 42 note 

Chedworth, John, 73 

Cheive, Thomas, 88 

Chichele, Archbishop, 60 

Chicheley, Sir Henry, 110 



Clarendon, Lord, quoted, 95, 96, 124, 128 
and note 

Clarke, Dr., 141 

Clavering, Robert, 164, 181, 233 

Clayton, Richard, Master, 122; Canon of 
Salisbury, Bursar, his energy as 
Master, 126, 127 ; his letter to Lord 
Arlington's secretary, 129 note; death, 

Cockman, Thomas, Master, 156 ; his dis- 
puted election, 172, 173 ; consequent 
anarchy, 174, 175; his election con- 
firmed by Royal Commission, 176 ; his 
character, 179, 180; his death, 181; 
buried in the chapel, 214 

Conniugton, John, 202 

Cornwallis, John, 162 

Cox, Richard, 81, 82 

Cranmer, Archbishop : Holcot's visit to 
him, 83, 84 

Crayford, John, Master : his strange life, 
80 ; his character and death, 81 

Cricket, 232 

Croft, George, 182 

Croft, Herbert, 183 

Croke, Sir George, 94 

Cromwell, Oliver, 110, 115, 118, 121 

Cross, Lord, 204 note 

Crum, John, 52 

Crump, Henry, 52, 55 

Culpepper, Sir Thomas, 154 

Cuthbert, St. : patron saint of Durham 
and of the College, 4, 18 ; chapel dedi- 
cated to, 50 ; his figure in the windows, 
66, 67 ; his statue, 212 ; on the Col- 
lege seal, 223 

DANVERS, Joanna : her benefaction, 65 

D'Arcy, Conyers, 110 

Davey, Lord, 202 

Dean, office of, 91 

Deane, Thomas, 137, 138, 147, 152 

Decretum, 22, 28 

Dennison, William, 164, 172, 173, 175, 


Digges, Sir Dudley, 94, 95 and note 
Digges, Leonard, 153 
Donkin, William, 199 
Drowda Hall, 14, 61 
Dudley, Robert. See Leicester 
Dudley, William, 72 
Duffield, Thomas, Master, 31 
Dugdale, James, Master, 74 ; deprived 

for not acknowledging the Queen's 

supremacy, 83, 84 
Durham Hall, 34 

EDUCATION : the College becomes an edu- 
cational body, 71 ; provision made for 
a teaching staff, 88 ; lectures organized, 
90, 91 ; reputation as a place of educa- 
tion, 98 ; the work of a tutor, 99, 100 ; 
celebrated tutors, 160, 162, 168, 180, 
185, 186, 188, 189, 200, 201 ; subjects 
studied besides theology, 87 ; Latin, 
26, 161, 163 ; Greek, 85, 91, 188 ; philo- 
sophy and logic, 88, 91, 92 ; French, 
163; law, 186, 189, 190; Obadiah 
Walker's work on education, 101 and 

Eldon. See Scott 

Elizabeth, Queen : grants a charter, 18, 
89 ; her visit to Oxford, 86 

Elizabeth Grant's Memoirs, 194 

Ellerton, Edward, 183, 193 

Ellison, George, Master, 74 ; his election, 
81 ; his death, 82 ; his religious views, 
82, 83 

Elmhirst, John, 102, 106 

Elstob, William, 155, 160, 164 note 

FABER, George Stanley, 183, 193 

Faber, F. W., 199 

Farmer, Anthony, 145 

Farrer, Edward, Master : his character 
as Fellow, 123; his election as Master, 
150 ; his experience, 156 ; his benefac- 
tion, 157 and note; buried in the 
chapel, 214 

Fausset, Bryan, ISO, 182 

Fellows : early statutes for, 20-30 ; 
various titles, 36, 37 ; small number 
of, 48, 72, 75, 82 ; leave of absence 
granted, 96, 108 ; suspension of fel- 
lowships, 114, 125 

Fitzhugh, Richard, 60 

Fitzhugh, Robert, 72 

Fitzralph, Richard, 42, 54 and note 

Flamstead, 103, 156 

Flavel, John, 154 

Flaxman, 214 

Fleming, Richard, 56, 60 

Fleming, Robert, 73 

Football, 232 

Forster, William Edward, 204 note 

Foston, Thomas, Master, 31 

Fox, Sir Stephen, 162 

Francis, Edmund and Idonea : lawsuit 
with, 38-48 

1 French petition,' the, 41, 42 

Freeston, John : his benefaction, 91, 92 
96, 203 



GALE, George, 118 

Gate, Anthony, Master, 74 ; a layman, 
91 ; death, 92 ; his young relations, 

99 note 

Gladstone, William Ewart, 204 note 
Gold, Thomas, 88 
Goldsmith, 37, 38 and note, 39 
Gonwardby, John, 38 and note 
Goring, Francis, 110 
Graham, Richard, 163 and note 
Gray, Archbishop, 17 
Gray, Bishop of Cape Town, 198, 225 
Greek, 85 and note, 91, 188 
Greenwood, Charles, 92 ; Fellow and 
tutor, 96 ; his character, 97 and note , 

100 note; his benefactions, 103, 105, 
119, 206 ; arms on the chapel window, 

Gregforth, William, Master 53; suc- 
ceeded as Senior Fellow, 69 ; lived in 
the tower, 69 note; treated with 
respect, 70 

Griffith, James, Master, 184 ; his elec- 
tion, 193 ; character, 194 ; death, 198 ; 
designs and a plan for hall and chapel, 
212 ; buried in the chapel, 214 

Griffiths, Richard, 119, 123, 124 

Grimston, Sir Harbottle, 128, 135 

Gunsley, Robert, 102, 103 

HALES, Sir Edward : his speech, 144 note; 
Roman Catholic, 145 ; at the Battle of 
the Boyne, 151 and note ; his portrait 
in the hall, 225 

Halifax, Lord, 128 

Hall : the old refectory, 49 ; a new hall 
built, 63 ; its position, 66 ; white- 
washed, 105 ; the present hall, 120 ; 
rule for dining in hall, 161, 163, 165 ; 
alterations in, 194 ; its building, 208, 
209 ; plan for enlarging, 209 note ; 
portraits in, 225 

Hammond, Edmund, 198 

Hamsterley, Ralph, Master, 74 ; his elec- 
tion 75 ; summoned to Lambeth, 76 ; 
dissensions, 77 ; inaugurates the 
Register, 77 ; buried in Morton, 78 ; 
completes the tower, 79 ; lived in 
Little University Hall, 79 

Hanley Park, 104, 208 

Harcourt, Sir Simon, 162 

Harley, Lady : letters to her son, 100 
and note, 101 

Hastings, Francis Rawdon, 189 ; his 
portrait in the hall and in the Master's 
Lodgings, 225 

Hatfield, Bishop, 9 

Hawle, William, 83 

Headbourne- Worthy, 168, 170 

Hearne, Thomas: quoted, 6, 86, 164, 
166 and note, 178, 179 note 

Henry III. : invites scholars from Paris, 

Henry IV. : acknowledges the College, 
3, 55 

Henry VII. : orders Masses to bo said 
for Anne of Warwick, 63 note 

Henshawe, Thomas, 110 

Herbert, Lord, 92, 99 note, 226 

Hinchliffe, Edward, 141 note 

Hinckley, John, 164, 165, 212 

Hogg, Thomas Jefferson : quoted, 195 ; 
expelled with Shelley, 196, 197 

Holcot, William, 83, 84 and note 

Hopkins, William : his benefaction, 157 

Home, George, 181, 233 

Hoyland, William, 17 

Hoyle, Joshua, 114, 116 

Hudson, John, 148 note, 164 note, 226 

Huet, John : his benefaction, 88 

Humphrey, Duke : supports Noreys, 57 

Hungerford, Robert de, 73 

Hungerford, Walter, 72 

Hunt, Otho : his benefaction, 93 

Hutchiuson, Leonard, Master, 74 ; had 
been Fellow of Balliol, 78 ; his learn- 
ing, 79 ; three Hutchinsous as Fel- 
lows, 79 ; resigns, 79 ; his religious 
views, 80 

Hyde. See Clarendon 

INETT, John, 155 
Ingleberd, Philip, 32-34 

JAGO, Richard, 180 

James I. : his visit to Oxford, 96 

James II. : approves Boyse's sermon, 
138 note; rejoicings at his accession, 
138 ; his letter to the College, 141 note; 
his opinion on Obadiah Walker's 
press, 144 ; erection of his statue, 
144 note; his visits to the College, 

James, William, Master, 74 ; Reader of 
Divinity at Magdalen, 88 ; his char- 
acter, 88 ; secures a charter, 89 ; or- 
ganizes the teaching, 90, 91; made 
Dean of Christ Church, 91 ; resigns 
the mastership, 91 

Jedewell, Idonea : her pedigree, 38 
note ; lawsuit with, 39-47 



Jenkinson, Charles, Lord Liverpool, 181, 

John of Beverley, 42, 43, 54 note 

Johnson, Francis, Master, 95 ; had been 
Fellow of All Souls, 118 ; nominated by 
Cromwell, 118 ; his poverty, 119 ; do- 
posed, 121 

Johnson, Dr. Samuel : friend of Cham- 
bers, 186 ; frequents the common- 
room, 190 and note 

Johnson, William, 137 

Jones, Thomas, 154 

Jones, William, 181, 233 

Jones, Sir William : his marvellous 
genius, 186 ; death, 187 ; his monu- 
ment in the aute-chapel, 187 and note, 
214 ; resigns his fellowship, 193 ; his 
portrait in the hall and in the Master's 
Lodgings, 225, 226 

KEXBY, John, 55 

Kexby, William, Master, 31, 52 

LACY, Edmund, Master, 31, 52, 53; 

orthodox, 56 ; his character, 59, 60 
Langbaine, Gerard, 6 
Langley, Thomas, 72 
Latin, 26, 161, 163, 206 
Laud, Chancellor : congratulated on his 

Archbishopric, 103 ; appoints Thomas 

Walker, 104 ; arranges the Bonnet 

benefaction, 105, 124 
Lawsuits, 2, 6, 39-47, 61, 124 
Leicester, Earl of : supports the election 

of his chaplain, William James, 88, 89 ; 

his bequest, 90 and note ; his portrait 

in the Master's Lodgings, 90 note, 225 ; 

his arms in the chapel window, 211 


Leland, quoted, 18 
Ley, Anthony, 140, 141 note 
Library, the : first books, 25, 50 ; Skir- 

law's legacy, 51, 58 ; Aspylon's legacy, 

68 ; Holcot's legacy, 84 and note ; 

Nourse's legacy, 133 ; the first library, 

51, 65 ; the old library, 130, 214, 215 ; 
' the present library, 215-217; MSS. 

sent to the Bodleian, 216 
Liddiard, William, 183 
Lindsey, 171 

Little University Hall, 57, 59, 63, 69 
Lockhart, John Ingram, 189 
Lodelowe Hall, 35, 49, 51 
Loftus, Dudley, 153 
Lowe, Robert, 7, 8, 198 

Lunsford, Sir Thomas, 110 
Lyttleton, Charles, 180-182 


Maples, Bishop of Likoma, 225 

Mark's Hall, 58, 59, 159 

Marten, John, Master, 53 

Martin, Henry, 110 and note, 111 

Mary, Queen : her statue, 219 

Maskell, William, 199 

Massey, John, 139 and note, 149 

Master, first mentions of, 23, 37, 69; 
elected by the Fellows, 74, 78, 80, 81, 
82, 85, 87, 91 ; appointed by the Chan- 
cellor, 92, 104 ; appointed by the 
Archbishop, 98; appointed by Par- 
liament, 114, 116, 118, 121 ; elected by 
the Fellows, 126, 131, 150, 157, 158; 
disputed election, 173, 174 ; elected by 
the Fellows, 185, 187, 193, 199, 204 

Master's Lodgings, 63, 69, 79, 159, 218, 

Masters, list of, 31, 53, 74, 95, 122, 156, 

Matthew, Toby, 87 

Maurice, Thomas, 182 

Medd, Peter, 214 note 

Mellish, George, 199 

Melsonby Rectory, 178 note 

Meiiziea, Thomas, 189 

Monckton, Sir Philip, 110 

Morisoii, Robert, 155 

Mortimer, Dr., 190 note 

Myers, Robert : his benefaction, 200 

NAILOK, John, 138 

Nevile, John, 164 

Nevill, Cavendish, 173 note 

Newdigate, Sir Roger, 180, 188, 209, 225 

Nicholas de Farnham, 9-11 

Nicholson, Francis, 136 and note, 151 

Noreys, Philip, 57 

Northcote, Lord, 204 note 

Nourse, Timothy, 132, 133 and note 

GATES, Titus : his connection with Tonge, 

117, 134, 135 

Oseuey Abbey, lawsuit with, 3, 61 
Owen, Vice-Chancellor, 118 
Gxenden, Ashton, 198 

PARIS UNIVERSITY, connection with, 9, 

11, 12 

Parsons, Robert, 154 
Polham, Henry : his letter quoted, 151 



Perrot, Simon : his benefaction, 90 

Pierson, Peter, 75, 76 note 

Pigott, Arthur, 189 

Plate, list of, in 1422, 71 note ; pawned 
for Charles I., 107, 108 ; replenished, 

Plot, Robert, 7, 148 note, 160 and note 

Plumer, Sir Thomas, 189, 226 

Plumptre, Frederick, Master, 184 ; cha- 
racter, 199 ; his benefaction, 200 ; his 
death, 204 ; his window, 213 ; buried 
in the chapel, 214 ; his portrait in the 
hall, 225 

Pokelyngton, John, Master, 31 ; his 
journey to London, 45 

Potter, John, Archbishop, 160 ; his por- 
trait in the Hall and in the Master's 
Lodgings, 225 

Prickett, 164 and note, 166 note 

Printing press, Obadiah Walker's, 136, 
143, 144, 147 

RADCLIFFE, Sir George, 98 and note, 100, 
101, 153 

Radcliffe, James, 92 

Radcliffe, John : pupil of Obadiah 
Walker, 148 ; gives Walker shelter, 
152 ; his letter to Walker, 152 note ; 
his early life, 168 ; physician to 
William III., 169 and note ; his bene- 
factions, 170 ; his window, 213 ; his 
statue, 219 ; his portrait in the hall, 

Radcliffe, Jonas, 100, 214 

Radcliffe, Thomas, 107, 122, 153 

Radeford, Laurence, 37, 38 

Radeford, Richard, 52 

Radnor, Earl of, 190, 225 

Reading, William, 155, 160 

Reed, Mrs. : her gift for the chapel, 211 

Religion : the College founded for the 
study of theology, 1, 3, 12, 17, 21, 22, 
25, 27, 28, 49, 68, 72, 90, 126 ; its sym- 
pathy with the Reformation, 53-57, 80, 
83, 103, 123 ; Roman Catholic phase, 
131-152 ; its orthodoxy, 161, 196 ; obli- 
gation to take Orders repealed, 202, 203 

Richard II., petition to, 1, 41; his 
assistance, 45 

Richardson, Sir John, 193, 225 

Richardson, Richard, 148 note 

Ridley, C. J., 196 and note 

Ridley, Nicholas, the reformer, 78 

Riplingham, Robert de : his benefaction, 

Rochester School, 103 

Rokysburgh, John, Master, 53, 74 

Rose Hall purchased, 35 

Rowley, George, Master, 184 ; as Dean, 
195 ; elected as Master, 198 ; Vice- 
Chancellor, death, 199 ; buried in the 
chapel, 214 

Russell, John, 127 

ST. FRIDESWIDE'S, lawsuit with, 39 

St. Mary's Church, 50, 56, 76, 133, 136, 
138, 170, 175 

St. Peter's Church, 50, 87, 125, 168 

Salisbury, Lord, 204 note 

Salveyn, Anthony, Master, 74; his 
religious views, 82, 83 

Salveyn, Richard, Master, 74 : an ab- 
sentee Fellow, 79 ; resigned, 81 

Savile, Sir George, 95-97 note 

Savile, John, 128, 129 note 

Say, William, 110, 111 note 

Scott, Gilbert, 212, 215 

Scott, John : Lord Eldon, 188 and note ; 
resigns his fellowship, 189 ; his statue, 
215, 216 ; his portrait in the hall and 
in the Master's Lodgings, 225 

Scott, William: Lord Stowell, 187; 
Reader in Greek and Professor of 
Ancient History, 188 ; Dean and tutor, 
189 ; resigns his fellowship, 193 ; the 
Stowell fellowship, 199; his statue, 
215, 216 ; his portrait in the hall and 
in the Master's Lodgings, 225 

Seal, an early impression of the, 13 note ; 
described, Appendix A, 223, 224 

Selborne, Lord, 204 note 

Shelley, Lady, 220 

Shelley, Percy Bysshe, 195-197, 220 

Shelley, Sir Timothy, 195 

Shepherd, Dr. : his benefaction, 200, 

Sherwood, John, 68 

Shirewood, William, 52 

Sibthorpe, John, 189 

Sidmouth, Lady : founds the Stowell 
fellowship, 199 

Silvester, Thomas, 113 

Skirlaw, Walter: special benefactor, 7 
note, 9 ; his donation of books, 51 ; his 
great abilities, 57 ; his benefactions, 
58, 59 ; figure and arms in the chapel 
windows, 67, 211 note; his exhibition, 
78, 203 

Smith, Goldwin, 202 

Smith, William : quoted, 4, 9, 11, 15, 19, 
40, 104, 117, 138, 145, 147 ; might have 
been Master, 157; supervised Char- 



lett's election, 158; quoted, 161; in 
opposition to Charlett, 165 ; writes 
Annals of University College, 176 ; his 
great work, 177 ; his transcripts, 178 
and note; Hearne's opinion of him, 
179 and note 

Smoking forbidden, 101, 102 

Somerset, Charles, Duko of Beaufort, 

Somerset, Henry, Duke of Beaufort, 181 

Sorbonne, the, 12, 20, 27 

Spicer's Hall, 33, 34, 49, 63 

Squire, William, 120, 123 and note, 124, 

Stanihurst, Richard, 87 

Stanley, Arthur, Fellow and tutor, 200 ; 
his great influence, 201 ; secretary to 
the University Commission, 202 ; Dean 
of Westminster, 204 ; his portrait in 
the hall, 225 

Statutes, the early, 10, 20-29; the 
Chandler statutes, 68-70 ; Elizabethan 
charter, 89 ; statutes revised, 124, 179, 
202, 203 

Stedman, Rowland, 119, 154 

Stone, Francis, 182 

Stowell. See Scott 

Strafford, Lord, 97 

Strode, Thomas, 154 

TAYLOR, Francis, 173 note 

Tempest, Mr., 171 note 

Thompson, Mr., 129 and note 

Thornhill, Richard, 110 

Thornton, Thomas, 118 

Thorpe, Charles, 183, 233 

Thorpe, John, 155, 160 

Tilson, Henry, 94 

Todd, Hugh, 137 and note, 148 note, 155 

Tomson, Giles, 87 

Tonge, Ezreel, 116 and note t 117 and note, 

118-120, 135 and note 
Trigge, Francis, 93 
Twiss, Sir Travers, 198 
Twyne, Brian, 4 note, 5, 6, 42 note, 86 

note, 108 note 
Twysden, John, 153 

UNDERGRADUATES : first mention of, 26, 
27, 58, 70, 71 ; their age, 99 and note, 109 ; 
their amusements, 100, 101, 127, 198, 
200 ; their number, 82, 102, 112 note, 
175 note ; gentlemen commoners, 127, 
142 note, 145, 171, 181, 189, 191, 192 ; 
discipline, 101, 102, 126, 127, 161, 192, 

193, 196, 197 ; their studies, 26, 87, 88, 
01, 162, 163, 180, 185, 188 ; their library, 

University, the : its close connection 
with the College, 12, 13, 16, 21-24, 29, 
30, 53 

University College : its first site, 31 ; its 
move to the present site, 32, 35 ; its 
first purchases, 13, 14, 31, 33-35, 59; 
its name, 14, 17, 18, 32, 36, 41, 89 ; its 
buildings, 48, 49, 51, 62-67, 69, 71, 79, 
93, 102-106, 125, 129, 130, 133, 169, 170, 
205-222 ; its poverty, 21, 32, 48, 60-62, 
71, 88, 93, 96, 108 note, 114, 119, 124, 
125 ; its loyalty to Charles I., 107-110, 
166 ; under the Commonwealth, 111- 
119, 128 ; its Roman Catholic period, 
137-152, 217 ; changes effected by the 
University Commissions, 202, 203 

Usher, Charles, 164, 165 

Ussher, Henry, 87, 93 

VISITORIAL AUTHORITY : exercised by the 
University, 30, 75, 85, 149, 150, 173- 
175 ; exercised bv the Crown, 6, 
42, 43, 55, 81, 82, 121, 172-177 ; exer- 
cised by Parliamentary Commission 

WAKEMAN, 147 and note 

Waldeby, Roberb, 52, 67 

Walker, Obadiah, Master: his book on 
education, 101 and note ; Bursar, 108 ; 
delegate to Westminster, 112 ; refuses 
submission, 113 ; expelled, 113 ; re- 
stored, 122 ; his letter to Lady Russell, 
127 ; his appeals for subscriptions, 129, 
130 ; elected Master, 131 ; his religious 
opinions, 131-133 ; his energy in build- 
ing, 133 ; accused as a Papist, 134, 135 ; 
his books forbidden, 136, 137 ; secures 
Roman Catholic Fellows, 138 ; visits 
King James, 139; says Mass openly, 
140 ; makes a chapel, 141, 142 ; his 
printing-press, 143 and note; the 
King's visit, 144, 145 ; commissioner 
on the Magdalen case, 145; leaves 
Oxford, 146 ; his character, 147, 148 ; 
accused of high treason, imprisoned, 
149 ; is deposed, 150 ; his old age and 
death, 152; he ordered the chapel 
windows, 210 note, 211 ; his books in 
the library, 217 

Walker, Thomas, Master, 95 ; member of 
St. John's and friend of Laud, 104 


sympathy with Charles I., 107, 108 ; his 
private account-book, 109 ; his illness, 
112; deposed, 113; expelled, 115; 
restored, 121 ; alters the Bennet bene- 
faction, 124; his financial arrange- 
ments, 125 ; builds the chapel, 125 ; 
gave MSS. to the library, 216; his 
eagerness in building, 217 ; his ac- 
counts, 217, 218 

Wanley, Humphrey, 160, 164 

Ward, George, 166, 175, 180 

Warham, Archbishop, 75, 76 

Warneford, Samuel, 189, 233 

Washington, James, 110 

Washington, Richard, 113, 156 

Watkins, Henry, 113 

Watson, George, 182 

Wentworth, Thomas, 94, 95 

Westby : his journey to London, 44 

Wetherell, Sir Charles, 193 

Wetherell, Nathan, Master, 184; his 
election, 187 ; his character, 188 : his 
discipline, 192 ; Dean of Hereford and 
death, 193 ; buried in the chapel, 214 ; 
his monument in the ante-chapel, 214 

White Hall purchased, 35 

White, John : his election, 115 

Whyte, Robert, 151 

William III. : Dr. Radcliffehis physician, 
169 and note 

William of Durham : founder, 4, 7 ; 
his life, 8-13 : his example followed, 
17 ; forgotten in the sixteenth cen- 
tury, 18 ; his fame restored by William 
Smith, 19, 176 : his early statutes, 20- 
30 ; his arms, 67, 211 note, 223, 224 

Williamson, Clayton's letters to, 129 note 

Wilmot, John Eardly, 182 

Wilson, Samuel, 101, 102 

Windham, William, 189, 233 

Windows, the old, 66, 67 ; the Dutch, 
210 and note 

Wolveridge, John, 131 

Wood, Anthony: quoted, 6, 42, 51, 55, 
65, 66, 77, 99, 120, 122, 124, 126, 135 
note, 138, 143 

Woodhead, Abraham: ejected, 116; 
restored, 122 ; his letter, 131 ; tutor to 
Obadiah Walker, 132 ; Roman Catholic, 
132 note; his old age, 133 and note; 
his will, 136 ; his learning, 148 ; his 
books, 151 ; his Latin speech, 206 

Wright, John, 78, 79 

Wycliffe, sympathy with, 53, 54 

Wytton, Sir Richard, Master, 3 note, 42 
note, 53, 60, 69 



Return to desk from which borrowed. 
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 



JUL 3 1954 L 
REC. cm. mt 0.1 




3 '83 




I >X